RS3 TFSI quattro 2.5L Sedan vs Charger 3.6L GT Comparison
Car Information
Engine / Motor
280 km/h
210 km/h
4
/
2480 cc
/
GCC
/
Dimensions
5 Seater
5 Seater
4 Doors
/
4492 mm
5040 mm
1816 mm
1905 mm
1425 mm
1479 mm
2521 mm
3052 mm
355 L
455 L
165 m
/
Fuel Economy
8 Km/L
9.3 Km/L
50 L
70 L
8 Km/L
9.3 Km/L
Comfort
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
Smart Entry
/
✓
/
Interior
✓
/
✓
/
Leather
/
Dual Zone
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Electric
/
✓
/
✓
/
Bucket
/
/
✓
Safety
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Infotainment
9
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Android LCD
/
✓
/
8
/
Chassis & Steering
All Wheel Drive
Rear Wheel Drive
Key Spec
2.5 L
3.6 L - 6.4 L
400 BHP
292 BHP - 797 BHP
TBD
Automatic
Gasoline
Gasoline & Petrol
TBD
TBD
5 Seater
5 Seater
Exterior
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
LED
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Engine
In-Line
/
2.5 L
3.6 L
Gasoline
Gasoline
Single Turbo
/
4
/
400 BHP
300 BHP
500 Nm
358 Nm
Technologies
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
Comparison of configuration highlights
RS3 TFSI quattro 2.5L Sedan
- Electronic engine immobilizer
- Power Tailgate
- Rear Defogger
- Rear Power Outlet
- Heated Side Mirrors
- Parking sensor rear
- Parking sensor front
- Keyless Start
- Heater
- Rear Camera
- Headlight On Reminder
- Remote key types
- Steering Adjustment
- Anti-Theft Alarm System
- Speed Sensing Auto Door Lock
- Driver Seat Belt Warning
- ABS
- EBA/BA
- Passive Pedestrian Protection
- Child Lock
- Speed Alert
- Active braking
Charger 3.6L GT
- Parking sensor rear
- Parking sensor front
- Rear Camera
- ABS
Review Comparison
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Positive
- Amazing power and acceleration
- Unique American muscular design
- Pleasant driving experience and excellent control
Negative
- High fuel consumption
- The quality of interior materials is average
- Suspension comfort is not ideal
Related comparisons
Editor's PickCharger 3.6L GT
Expert / Editor Recommendation
Choose RS3 TFSI quattro 2.5L Sedan if you care more about power; choose Charger 3.6L GT if you care more about price.
Popular Car Comparisons
Q&A
- According to fuel consumption data, RS3 TFSI quattro 2.5L Sedan has a fuel consumption of 12.5, while Charger 3.6L GT has a fuel consumption of 10.75. Therefore, Charger 3.6L GT is more fuel-efficient.
- In terms of interior space, RS3 TFSI quattro 2.5L Sedan has a wheelbase of 2521 mm, while Charger 3.6L GT has a wheelbase of 3052 mm. Generally, the model with the longer wheelbase, Charger 3.6L GT, offers more room.
- Check drive type, ground clearance and torque together. RS3 TFSI quattro 2.5L Sedan uses All Wheel Drive, while Charger 3.6L GT uses Rear Wheel Drive.