2000 Chrysler ESX 3 vs. 2003 Ford Ecosport
To start off, 2003 Ford Ecosport is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Chrysler ESX 3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 would be higher. At 1,600 cc (4 cylinders), 2003 Ford Ecosport is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Ford Ecosport (109 HP) has 35 more horse power than 2000 Chrysler ESX 3. (74 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2003 Ford Ecosport should accelerate faster than 2000 Chrysler ESX 3.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear wheel drive vehicles. 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. 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 has automatic transmission and 2003 Ford Ecosport has manual transmission. 2003 Ford Ecosport will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
2000 Chrysler ESX 3 | 2003 Ford Ecosport | |
Make | Chrysler | Ford |
Model | ESX 3 | Ecosport |
Year Released | 2000 | 2003 |
Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1499 cc | 1600 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 74 HP | 109 HP |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4910 mm | 4228 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1980 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1679 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3000 mm | 2490 mm |