1996 Eagle Vision vs. 2002 MCC Crossblade

To start off, 2002 MCC Crossblade is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Eagle Vision. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Eagle Vision would be higher. At 3,200 cc (6 cylinders), 1996 Eagle Vision is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1996 Eagle Vision (217 HP) has 147 more horse power than 2002 MCC Crossblade. (70 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1996 Eagle Vision should accelerate faster than 2002 MCC Crossblade. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1996 Eagle Vision weights approximately 880 kg more than 2002 MCC Crossblade. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.

Because 2002 MCC Crossblade is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2002 MCC Crossblade. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1996 Eagle Vision, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. 1996 Eagle Vision has automatic transmission and 2002 MCC Crossblade has manual transmission. 2002 MCC Crossblade will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 1996 Eagle Vision will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.

Compare all specifications: