2002 Acura RSX vs. 2013 Jeep Compass
To start off, 2013 Jeep Compass is newer by 11 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 2,400 cc (4 cylinders), 2013 Jeep Compass is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 Acura RSX (223 HP @ 5600 RPM) has 53 more horse power than 2013 Jeep Compass. (170 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2002 Acura RSX should accelerate faster than 2013 Jeep Compass. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Jeep Compass weights approximately 219 kg more than 2002 Acura RSX.
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. Let's talk about torque, 2013 Jeep Compass (224 Nm) has 31 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 Acura RSX. (193 Nm). This means 2013 Jeep Compass will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 Acura RSX.
Compare all specifications:
2002 Acura RSX | 2013 Jeep Compass | |
Make | Acura | Jeep |
Model | RSX | Compass |
Year Released | 2002 | 2013 |
Body Type | Coupe | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1999 cc | 2400 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 223 HP | 170 HP |
Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 193 Nm | 224 Nm |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Transmission Type | Automatic | CVT |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1230 kg | 1449 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4380 mm | 4448 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1730 mm | 1811 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2540 mm | 2634 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 65 L | 51 L |