Compare Citroen DS3 Cabrio vs Citroen C3 Pluriel vs Chrysler PT Cruiser Convertible
Variants
1.2 PureTech 110
1.2 PureTech 82
1.6 BlueHDi 100
1.6 BlueHDi 120
1.6 e-HDi 90
1.6 e-HDi 90 ETG
1.6 THP 155
1.6 THP 165
1.6 VTi 120
1.6 VTi 120 AT
1.1
1.4 HDi
1.4 HDi Euro4
1.4i
1.4i Euro4
1.6i AT
1.6i Euro4 AT
2.0
2.0 AT
2.4
2.4 Turbo
2.4 Turbo AT
Capacity
Cargo Capacity
245 L / 8.7 cu-ft
267 L / 9.4 cu-ft
375 L / 13.2 cu-ft
Coolant Capacity
6.2 L / 6.6 qt
Engine Oil Capacity
3.8 L / 4.0 qt
4.7 L / 5.0 qt
Fuel Capacity
57.0 L / 15.1 gal
Passengers
4
4
4
Payload
400 kg / 882 lbs
Chassis
Brakes | Front
Ventilated discs
Ventilated discs
Brakes | Rear
Disc
Power Steering
Electric Steering
Hydraulic Steering
Suspension | Front
MacPherson strut
MacPherson strut
MacPherson strut
Suspension | Rear
Semi-independent, Elastic beam
Semi-independent, coil spring
Semi-independent, Torsion
Tire Size
195/65 R15
Turning Circle
10.2 m / 33.5 ft
Construction
Body Style
3-door Convertible
2-door Convertible
2-door Convertible
Dimensions
Size | Height
1458 mm / 57.4 in
1600 mm / 63.0 in
Size | Length
3948 mm / 155.4 in
3934 mm / 154.9 in
4290 mm / 168.9 in
Size | Width
1715 mm / 67.5 in
1700 mm / 66.9 in | 1877 mm / 73.9 in (mirror unfolded)
1705 mm / 67.1 in
Track Width | Front
1465.0 mm / 57.7 in
1435.0 mm / 56.5 in
1480.0 mm / 58.3 in
Track Width | Rear
1467.0 mm / 57.8 in
1431.0 mm / 56.3 in
1480.0 mm / 58.3 in
Weight
1500.0 kg / 3306.9 lbs
Wheel Size
6J x 15
Wheelbase
2460 mm / 96.9 in
2615 mm / 103.0 in
Performance
CO2 Emission
235 g/km
Coefficient Of Drag
0.32
Powertrain
Drivetrain Layout
Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive
Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive
Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive
Engine | Bore
87.5 mm / 3.4 in
Engine | Compression Ratio
9.6:1
Engine | Displacement
2.0 L / 121.8 cu-in / 1996.0 cc
Engine | Specific Output
68.1 hp/L / 1.1 hp/cu-in
Engine | Stroke
83.0 mm / 3.3 in
Engine | Torque
188 Nm / 138.7 lb-ft @ 4150 rpm
Transmission | Gears
5-speed
Reviews
Neofiliac score
12%
25%
23%
Pros
- Low fuel consumption
- Small turning circle
- Reasonable reliability
- Innovative top configuration
- Easy to fix
- OK-looking with the top down
Cons
- Rough engines for a convertible
- Hatchback-based
- No independent rear suspensions
- No powerful engine options
- Only available with small engines
- Low cargo capacity
- Slow and sluggish
- Miserably low engine output
- Only available with small, rough-running engines
- No independent rear suspensions
- Very ugly indeed
- Slow and sluggish
- Ugly with the top up
- No powerful engine options
- Poor chassis and suspension
Remove
Remove
Remove
Add up to 4 products to the comparison using the search bar above
Information on this page is provided on an as-is basis. No warranty on accuracy is implied. This page may contain affiliate links to third-party merchants such as Amazon and eBay. If you make a purchase using the supplied link, we may receive a commission. Neofiliac places the utmost respect for your privacy. We use no cookie whatsoever beyond that needed for the proper functioning of the website.