2002 Jeep Compass vs. 2009 Mazda CX-9
To start off, 2009 Mazda CX-9 is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Jeep Compass. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Jeep Compass would be higher. At 3,724 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Mazda CX-9 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Mazda CX-9 (273 HP) has 63 more horse power than 2002 Jeep Compass. (210 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mazda CX-9 should accelerate faster than 2002 Jeep Compass. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2002 Jeep Compass weights approximately 226 kg more than 2009 Mazda CX-9.
Both vehicles are four wheel drive (4WD) - it offers better handling, traction, and control in all driving conditions compared with front wheel drive or 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, 2009 Mazda CX-9 (366 Nm) has 47 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 Jeep Compass. (319 Nm). This means 2009 Mazda CX-9 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 Jeep Compass.
Compare all specifications:
2002 Jeep Compass | 2009 Mazda CX-9 | |
Make | Jeep | Mazda |
Model | Compass | CX-9 |
Year Released | 2002 | 2009 |
Body Type | Crossover | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3700 cc | 3724 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 210 HP | 273 HP |
Torque | 319 Nm | 366 Nm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | 4WD | 4WD |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 7 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1406 kg | 1180 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4160 mm | 5080 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1840 mm | 1940 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1640 mm | 1730 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2660 mm | 2880 mm |