Compare Opel Astra H TwinTop vs Ford Mustang 6 Convertible vs Chevrolet Camaro 5 Convertible
Variants
1.6 105
1.6 115
1.6T
1.8 125
1.8 140
1.8 140 AT
1.9 CDTI
2.0T 170
2.0T 200
2.3 EcoBoost 309
2.3 EcoBoost 309 AT
2.3 EcoBoost 317
2.3 EcoBoost 317 AT
3.7 304
3.7 304 AT
GT 421
GT 421 AT
GT 426
GT 426 AT
L99 AT
LS3
Capacity
Cargo Capacity
205 L / 7.2 cu-ft ~ 440 L / 15.5 cu-ft
332 L / 11.7 cu-ft
Engine Oil Capacity
7.6 L / 8.0 qt
Fuel Capacity
52.0 L / 13.7 gal
Passengers
4
4
4
Payload
470 kg / 1036 lbs
Chassis
Brakes | Front
Ventilated discs
Ventilated discs
Ventilated discs
Brakes | Rear
Ventilated discs
Ventilated discs
Power Steering
Electric Steering
Electric Steering
Suspension | Front
MacPherson strut
MacPherson strut
Multi-link
Suspension | Rear
Semi-independent
Multi-link
Multi-link
Turning Circle
11.2 m / 36.7 ft
11.6 m / 38.0 ft
Construction
Body Style
2-door Convertible
2-door Convertible
2-door Convertible
Dimensions
Ground Clearance
122 mm / 4.8 in
Size | Height
1411 mm / 55.6 in
1394 mm / 54.9 in
1378 mm / 54.3 in
Size | Length
4476 mm / 176.2 in
4837 mm / 190.4 in
Size | Width
1759 mm / 69.3 in | 2021 mm / 79.6 in (mirror unfolded) | 1831 mm / 72.1 in (mirror folded)
1917 mm / 75.5 in
Track Width | Front
1488.0 mm / 58.6 in
1582.0 mm / 62.3 in
1618.0 mm / 63.7 in
Track Width | Rear
1481.0 mm / 58.3 in
1618.0 mm / 63.7 in
Wheelbase
2614 mm / 102.9 in
2720 mm / 107.1 in
2852 mm / 112.3 in
Performance
Coefficient Of Drag
0.31
0.35
Top Speed
250.0 km/h / 155.3 mph
Powertrain
Drivetrain Layout
Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive
Front-engine (longitudinal), Rear-wheel drive
Emission Standard
Euro 4
Euro 5
Engine | Bore
103.2 mm / 4.1 in
Engine | Displacement
6.2 L / 376.0 cu-in / 6162.0 cc
Engine | Stroke
92.0 mm / 3.6 in
Transmission | Gears
6-speed
6-speed
Production
Availability
2006 ~ 2010
2015 ~ 2017
Reviews
Neofiliac score
29%
78%
76%
Pros
- Cheap hardtop convertible
- True top-down driving experience
- Decent styling
- Improved styling
- Better build quality
- Fully independent suspensions
- Athletic design
- Wide range of powerful yet efficient engine choices
- Improved drivetrain reliability
Cons
- Slow and sluggish
- No powerful engine options
- No independent rear suspensions
- Not very comfortable
- Tiny inline-4 engine
- Low cargo capacity
- Low side and rear visibility
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.