Model Year | 2016 | 2006 | |
Model | Dodge Charger | Nissan *CL55 AMG | |
Engine | |||
Transmission | |||
Drivetrain | |||
Body | |||
Difference | |||
Total Legroom | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in |
2016 Dodge Charger Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Comment | |
2015 | The Road & Track package includes some of the best front seats I've experienced. The side bolsters, though not adjustable, manage to effectively hold slender drivers in place without uncomfortably constraining far-from-slender ones. Synthetic suede center panels assist in this task. Yet as performance-oriented as these seats are, they aren't overly firm, and should prove comfortable even on day-long drives. Despite the more hardcore nature of the Chevrolet SS, its front seats have much smaller, far less effective bolsters. Some synthetic suede helps to mitigate this shortcoming, but the Dodge's buckets are much better for both comfort and support. see full Dodge Charger review |
2016 Dodge Charger Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Comment | |
The Dodge Charger's rear seat cushion is comfortably shaped and positioned. Rear knee room, though less abundant than the sedan's exterior dimensions might suggest, is neverless generous. So what is rear seat room doing among the reasons not to buy a Charger? Well, headroom is in short supply. People 5-11 and up could become painfully familiar with the backlight. Shorter passengers won't experience this issue, but could find the back seat uncomfortably confining because the smallish rear side windows descend only to neck level. For more rear headroom and larger rear side windows, check out the related Chrysler 300. Or the Chevrolet SS, which has 1.4 inches more rear headroom than the Charger. see full Dodge Charger review |
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2016 Dodge Charger.
2006 Nissan *CL55 AMG Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2007 | 4dr Hatch 122-horsepower 1.8L I4 6-speed manual FWD |
Best in class, even better than the much larger Altima. see full Nissan *CL55 AMG review |
2007 | 4dr Hatch 122-horsepower 1.8L I4 6-speed manual FWD |
Memory foam in the seats enhances comfort, along with well-positioned head restraints and wide seating surfaces. see full Nissan *CL55 AMG review |
2007 | 4dr Hatch 122-horsepower 1.8L I4 4-speed automatic FWD |
Seating is not so low and cramped as most see full Nissan *CL55 AMG review |
2007 | 4dr Hatch 122-horsepower 1.8L I4 CVT FWD |
A lot of leg room and cup holders provided as well. see full Nissan *CL55 AMG review |
2007 | 4dr Hatch 122-horsepower 1.8L I4 CVT FWD |
The rear seat room was the first attraction to the car and we ended up comparing it to larger cars. Adults are perfectly comfortable in the rear of this car, more so than larger cars. see full Nissan *CL55 AMG review |
2007 | 4dr Sedan 122-horsepower 1.8L I4 CVT FWD |
Rear seat room is actually comfortable for people over 6 ft tall see full Nissan *CL55 AMG review |
2007 | 4dr Hatch 122-horsepower 1.8L I4 4-speed automatic FWD |
Comfortable & wide seating, almost as good as our newer 2008 CRV AWD, for both driver & passenger. Centre console area is small & could be better designed, especially cup holder & 12 volt power outlet. see full Nissan *CL55 AMG review |
2007 | 4dr Hatch 122-horsepower 1.8L I4 4-speed automatic FWD |
Excellent legrooms & headrests for 2 adult passengers, 3rd. person is fine for shorter trip as ours is mainly a solo driven commuter car most of the time. Seatback folds almost flat forward for larger packages (great for shopping at IKEA) see full Nissan *CL55 AMG review |
2007 | 4dr Hatch 122-horsepower 1.8L I4 CVT FWD |
Car feels much bigger than it is. see full Nissan *CL55 AMG review |
2007 | 4dr Hatch 122-horsepower 1.8L I4 CVT FWD |
Back seat leg room is exceptional for a small car. see full Nissan *CL55 AMG review |
2006 Nissan *CL55 AMG Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2007 | 4dr Hatch 122-horsepower 1.8L I4 4-speed automatic FWD |
The seats on this were really not nice. Cheap is the word. Poor shaping, no lumbar support. They have really improved this in the new 2012 sedan, at least. It only took them 5 years. see full Nissan *CL55 AMG review |