Atto 3 Premium vs 300 Challenger 2.0T Comparison
Review Comparison
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Positive
- Robust and distinctive exterior design
- High off road driving capabilities
- Advanced technology and comprehensive security systems
Negative
- Relatively high fuel consumption
- Limited interior space for rear seats
- Less efficient performance on highways
Price Comparison
SAR 145400
SAR 149327
SAR 139900
SAR 143635
SAR 1957
SAR 2010
Fuel Consumption Comparison
0 L/KM
0.1 L/KM
Daily Fule Payment
/
Daily Fule Payment
SAR 11.65
Weekly Fule Payment
/
Weekly Fule Payment
SAR 81.55
Monthly Fule Payment
/
Monthly Fule Payment
SAR 361.15
Yearly Fule Payment
/
Yearly Fule Payment
SAR 4252.25
Hide common specs
Car Information
Engine / Motor
160 km/h
200 km/h
Chinese
Chinese
/
4
/
1998 cc
Dimensions
5
5 Seater
215/55R18
/
5 Doors
5 Doors
4455 mm
4760 mm
2050 mm
1930 mm
1615 mm
1927 mm
2720 mm
2750 mm
440 L
400 L
205 mm
224 m
Fuel Economy
/
10 Km/L
/
75 L
/
10 Km/L
Comfort
✓
✓
✓
/
✔
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Smart Entry
Keyless Entry
✓
✓
/
✓
Interior
Front Row Seats
/
5
/
Front Row Seats
✓
✔
/
LCD
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
Leather
Leather
Digital
Digital
Single
Dual Zone
✓
✓
✔
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Electric
Electric
✓
✓
✓
✓
✔
/
Standard
Standard
/
✓
/
✓
Safety
✓
✓
✔
/
Automatic Anti-Glare
/
RCW
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
Infotainment
12.8”Electric Rotary Multimedia Screen
12.3
✓
✓
✓
✓
✔
/
✓
✓
Android LCD
Android LCD
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
8
9
Battery/Charging
AC (7KW) DC (80KW)
/
Transmission
DHT
Automatic
Chassis & Steering
Front Wheel Drive
Four Wheel Drive
Exterior
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
✔
/
✔
/
✓
✓
LED
LED
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
Engine
Electric
Gasoline
201 BHP
224 BHP
310 Nm
387 Nm
/
In-Line
/
2.0 L
/
Single Turbo
/
4
Motor
9
/
BYD Blade Battery (LFP)
/
Technologies
✓
/
✔
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
.png?x-oss-process=image/format,webp/interlace,1/quality,q_70/resize,w_750)
