CX90 Core AWD 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 167320
SAR 149327
SAR 161000
SAR 143635
SAR 2252
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
210 km/h
200 km/h
6
4
3289 cc
1998 cc
GCC
Chinese
Dimensions
7 Seater
5 Seater
19
/
5 Doors
5 Doors
5100 mm
4760 mm
1994 mm
1930 mm
1736 mm
1927 mm
/
2750 mm
608 L
400 L
201 m
224 m
Fuel Economy
/
10 Km/L
74
75 L
/
10 Km/L
Comfort
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Smart Entry
Keyless Entry
✓
/
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
Interior
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
Leather
Digital
Digital
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Electric
Electric
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
✓
Standard
Standard
/
Dual Zone
Safety
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
Infotainment
12.3
12.3
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Standard LCD
Android LCD
✓
✓
8
9
Transmission
8-speed Automatic
Automatic
Chassis & Steering
All Wheel Drive
Four Wheel Drive
Exterior
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
✓
LED
LED
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Engine
V
In-Line
3.3 L
2.0 L
Gasoline
Gasoline
Single Turbo
Single Turbo
4
4
284 BHP
224 BHP
450 Nm
387 Nm
Technologies
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
