X90 Plus 2.0T Comfort vs 300 Challenger 2.0T Comparison
Car Information
Engine / Motor
200 km/h
200 km/h
4
4
1998 cc
1998 cc
Chinese
Chinese
Dimensions
7
5 Seater
18
/
5 Doors
5 Doors
4838
4760 mm
1914
1930 mm
1775
1927 mm
2830
2750 mm
510 L
400 L
210 mm
224 m
Fuel Economy
12 Km/L
10 Km/L
57 L
75 L
12 Km/L
10 Km/L
Comfort
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Smart Entry
Keyless Entry
✓
✓
/
✓
Interior
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
✓
Leather
Leather
Digital
Digital
Dual Zone
Dual Zone
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Electric
Electric
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
✓
Standard
Standard
/
✓
/
✓
Safety
✓
✓
6
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Infotainment
12.3
12.3
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Android LCD
Android LCD
✓
✓
8
9
Transmission
/
Automatic
Chassis & Steering
Front Wheel Drive
Four Wheel Drive
Key Spec
1.6 L - 2.0 L
2.0 L
197 - 254
223 BHP - 342 BHP
7DCT & Automatic
Automatic
Gasoline & Petrol
Gasoline & Hybrid
TBD
TBD
7 - 7
5 Seater
Exterior
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
LED
LED
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
Engine
In-Line
In-Line
2.0 L
2.0 L
Gasoline
Gasoline
Twin Turbo
Single Turbo
4
4
254
224 BHP
390 Nm
387 Nm
Technologies
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Comparison of configuration highlights
X90 Plus 2.0T Comfort
- Electronic engine immobilizer
- 360 Degree camera
- Rear Defogger
- Rear Power Outlet
- Heated Side Mirrors
- Parking sensor rear
- Parking sensor front
- Keyless Start
- Heater
- Headlight On Reminder
- Remote key types
- Steering Adjustment
- Anti-Theft Alarm System
- Number of Airbags
- Speed Sensing Auto Door Lock
- Driver Seat Belt Warning
- ABS
- EBD/CBC
- EBA/BA
- Passive Pedestrian Protection
- Child Seat Interface (ISOFIX)
- Child Lock
- Speed Alert
- Active braking
300 Challenger 2.0T
- Electronic engine immobilizer
- 360 Degree camera
- 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
- EBD/CBC
- EBA/BA
- Passive Pedestrian Protection
- Child Lock
- Speed Alert
- Active braking
Review Comparison
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Related comparisons
Expert / Editor Recommendation
Choose X90 Plus 2.0T Comfort if you care more about price; choose 300 Challenger 2.0T if you care more about power.
Popular Car Comparisons
Q&A
- According to fuel consumption data, X90 Plus 2.0T Comfort has a fuel consumption of 8.33, while 300 Challenger 2.0T has a fuel consumption of 10. Therefore, X90 Plus 2.0T Comfort is more fuel-efficient.
- In terms of interior space, X90 Plus 2.0T Comfort has a wheelbase of 2830, while 300 Challenger 2.0T has a wheelbase of 2750 mm. Generally, the model with the longer wheelbase, X90 Plus 2.0T Comfort, offers more room.
- Check drive type, ground clearance and torque together. X90 Plus 2.0T Comfort uses Front Wheel Drive, while 300 Challenger 2.0T uses Four Wheel Drive.