2002 Ford Econovan vs. 2003 Smart Roadster
To start off, 2003 Smart Roadster is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Ford Econovan. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Ford Econovan would be higher. At 1,789 cc (4 cylinders), 2002 Ford Econovan is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Smart Roadster (100 HP @ 5250 RPM) has 10 more horse power than 2002 Ford Econovan. (90 HP @ 5500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2003 Smart Roadster should accelerate faster than 2002 Ford Econovan.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front 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, 2002 Ford Econovan (138 Nm @ 2500 RPM) has 8 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Smart Roadster. (130 Nm @ 2500 RPM). This means 2002 Ford Econovan will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Smart Roadster.
Compare all specifications:
2002 Ford Econovan | 2003 Smart Roadster | |
Make | Ford | Smart |
Model | Econovan | Roadster |
Year Released | 2002 | 2003 |
Body Type | Van | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Rear |
Engine Size | 1789 cc | 698 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 90 HP | 100 HP |
Engine RPM | 5500 RPM | 5250 RPM |
Torque | 138 Nm | 130 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2500 RPM | 2500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
Vehicle Length | 4290 mm | 3430 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1640 mm | 1620 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1870 mm | 1200 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2210 mm | 2370 mm |