2002 Acura RSX vs. 2010 Jaguar XF
To start off, 2010 Jaguar XF is newer by 8 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Acura RSX. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Acura RSX would be higher. At 3,000 cc (6 cylinders), 2010 Jaguar XF is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Jaguar XF (271 HP) has 48 more horse power than 2002 Acura RSX. (223 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Jaguar XF should accelerate faster than 2002 Acura RSX.
Because 2010 Jaguar XF 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 2010 Jaguar XF. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2002 Acura RSX, 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. Let's talk about torque, 2010 Jaguar XF (600 Nm) has 407 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 Acura RSX. (193 Nm). This means 2010 Jaguar XF will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 Acura RSX.
Compare all specifications:
2002 Acura RSX | 2010 Jaguar XF | |
Make | Acura | Jaguar |
Model | RSX | XF |
Year Released | 2002 | 2010 |
Body Type | Coupe | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1999 cc | 3000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 223 HP | 271 HP |
Torque | 193 Nm | 600 Nm |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | 6-speed shiftable automatic |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Length | 4380 mm | 4961 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1730 mm | 1877 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2540 mm | 2908 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 65 L | 70 L |