2002 MCC Crossblade vs. 2011 Ford Ecosport
To start off, 2011 Ford Ecosport is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 MCC Crossblade. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 MCC Crossblade would be higher. At 2,000 cc (4 cylinders), 2011 Ford Ecosport is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2011 Ford Ecosport (143 HP) has 73 more horse power than 2002 MCC Crossblade. (70 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2011 Ford Ecosport should accelerate faster than 2002 MCC Crossblade.
Because 2002 MCC Crossblade 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 2002 MCC Crossblade. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2011 Ford Ecosport, 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.
Compare all specifications:
2002 MCC Crossblade | 2011 Ford Ecosport | |
Make | MCC | Ford |
Model | Crossblade | Ecosport |
Year Released | 2002 | 2011 |
Engine Size | 599 cc | 2000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 3 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 70 HP | 143 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Vehicle Length | 2630 mm | 4228 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1630 mm | 1980 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1520 mm | 1679 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 1810 mm | 2490 mm |