Chrysler Vision: which version to buy

There is 1 generation (1992-01-01 to 1997-09-30) and 1 version: 3.5 AT. Body is Sedan. Drive is FWD. Gearbox is Automatic with 4 gears. Engine is Gasoline, 6 cylinders, V-shaped, 4 valves per cylinder, boost No, 3518 cm³, 211 hp (155 kW) at 5850 rpm, 288 Nm at 3450 rpm. If you want a Chrysler Vision from this dataset, you are buying that specification or you are not buying this model.

There is 1 generation (1992-01-01 to 1997-09-30) and 1 version: 3.5 AT. Body is Sedan. Drive is FWD. Gearbox is Automatic with 4 gears. Engine is Gasoline, 6 cylinders, V-shaped, 4 valves per cylinder, boost No, 3518 cm³, 211 hp (155 kW) at 5850 rpm, 288 Nm at 3450 rpm. If you want a Chrysler Vision from this dataset, you are buying that specification or you are not buying this model.

That is not a sales pitch. It is arithmetic on a single row. There is no second engine, no later restyle as a separate generation, and no AWD counterpart to compare. The useful work is to turn 3.5 AT into ratios you can judge, then list what this catalogue did not measure so you do not treat a blank as “does not exist.”

Generations: what changed (and what could not)

1 generation ran from 1992-01-01 to 1997-09-30. Body: Sedan. Versions in this generation: 13.5 AT.

There is no second generation in the data, so there is no generation-to-generation delta in horsepower, mass, or 0–100. Model years that people search (1993, 1994, 1996) sit inside this one production window. They are not extra generations and they do not add extra engines here. A 1993 3.5 AT and a 1996 3.5 AT share the same named specification in this catalogue: same 211 hp, same 288 Nm, same 3518 cm³, same Automatic 4, same FWD.

What “changed” between the start date and the stop date is therefore not measured as a restyle, a second body, or a second power figure. The buying implication is simple: you are not choosing a later generation with more power; you are choosing whether 3.5 AT itself is enough.

Engine and specs: the only version, named as in the database

VersionhpNmDisplacement (cm³)FuelCylindersLayoutBoostGearboxGearsDrive
3.5 AT2112883518Gasoline6V-shapedNoAutomatic4FWD

Further engine facts that belong next to 3.5 AT, not as a separate “motor” myth: 155 kW, peak power at 5850 rpm, peak torque at 3450 rpm, compression 10.4, engine position Front, longitudinal, fuel system Distributed injection (multi-point). Bore and stroke: not measured. Fuel grade (octane / named fuel): not measured.

6 cylinders × 4 valves per cylinder = 24 valves. Boost is No, so the 211 hp is the naturally aspirated figure for this 3518 cm³ Gasoline unit, not a boosted peak.

Power per litre for 3.5 AT: 211 hp ÷ 3.518 L = 60.0 hp/L (rounded to one decimal). In kW: 155 ÷ 3.518 = 44.1 kW/L. Torque per litre: 288 Nm ÷ 3.518 L = 81.9 Nm/L.

The spread between power peak and torque peak is 5850 − 3450 = 2400 rpm. Torque is quoted 2400 rpm below the power peak. That is the only rpm map this catalogue gives; it is not a full curve.

There is no second version to split by horsepower under the same name. If you see 3.5 AT here, it is the 211 hp row.

Performance and economy: what the extra (or missing) numbers buy

3.5 AT acceleration 0–100: 9.5 s. Top speed: 214 km/h.

City consumption: not measured. Highway consumption: not measured. Combined consumption: not measured. CO₂: not measured. Eco class: not measured.

A buying article that invented mpg would be false. The honest economy verdict is: you cannot rank 3.5 AT on litres per 100 km from this dataset. You can rank it on the two performance numbers that exist.

Mean speed implied by a 9.5 s 0–100 (100 km/h in 9.5 s) is a time stamp, not a fuel number. Top speed 214 km/h versus 100 km/h is a 114 km/h gap between the acceleration test endpoint and the maximum. Neither figure substitutes for city, highway, or mixed consumption.

If insurance, running cost, or “mpg” is the search that brought you here: those costs are not measured in this catalogue. Do not infer them from 211 hp or from the 68 L tank.

Dimensions and weight: kg per hp, payload, tank

Kerb weight 3.5 AT: 1615 kg. Gross weight: 2100 kg. Payload (gross − kerb): 2100 − 1615 = 485 kg. Ground clearance: not measured. Wheel sizes: not measured.

Kilograms per horsepower: 1615 ÷ 211 = 7.65 kg/hp. Horsepower per tonne (kerb): 211 ÷ 1.615 = 130.7 hp/t. On gross weight the same engine is 211 ÷ 2.100 = 100.5 hp/t — 30.2 hp/t less than on kerb, because 485 kg of allowance sits on the same 211 hp.

Tank: 68 L. Range in kilometres is not measured, because consumption is not measured. A 68 L tank without a litres/100 km figure does not yield a range; stating one would invent a number.

Front suspension: Independent, spring. Rear suspension: not measured. Front brakes: Ventilated disc. Rear brakes: Disc ventilated (English label as in the data). You cannot compare front vs rear by type beyond those two labels; both are ventilated disc wordings in the source.

Which version to choose — and why there is only one answer

Choose 3.5 AT if you want this model at all. It is the only named version: Gasoline 6 V-shaped, 3518 cm³, 211 hp, 288 Nm, Automatic 4, FWD, Sedan, kerb 1615 kg, 0–100 9.5 s, top speed 214 km/h.

What you are not choosing, because the data has no second row:

Internal arithmetic that is allowed as a “what you get” check on 3.5 AT:

What extra money cannot buy in this catalogue: a second engine, a restyled generation with its own key, measured mpg, measured CO₂, measured ground clearance, or measured wheel size. Those fields are not measured, not “optional equipment.”

Chrysler Vision 3.5 V6 / 3.5 / engine / motor searches all map to the same row: 3.5 AT, 211 hp, 155 kW, 288 Nm, 3518 cm³, 6 V-shaped, Gasoline. Chrysler Vision specs and dimensions for buying: use 1615 / 2100 kg, 68 L tank, clearance not measured, wheels not measured. Years 1993 / 1994 / 1996 do not unlock another modification here.

If you need a number this article does not give — city fuel, mixed fuel, CO₂, eco class, clearance, wheels, rear suspension, bore × stroke, named fuel — it is not measured for 3.5 AT. Treat that as a buying constraint, not as a missing paragraph.