2002 MCC Crossblade vs. 2013 Dodge CHARGER

To start off, 2013 Dodge CHARGER is newer by 11 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 3,600 cc (6 cylinders), 2013 Dodge CHARGER is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Dodge CHARGER (288 HP) has 218 more horse power than 2002 MCC Crossblade. (70 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Dodge CHARGER should accelerate faster than 2002 MCC Crossblade. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Dodge CHARGER weights approximately 1057 kg more than 2002 MCC Crossblade. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.

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, 2013 Dodge CHARGER (353 Nm @ 4800 RPM) has 251 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 MCC Crossblade. (102 Nm @ 3210 RPM). This means 2013 Dodge CHARGER will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 MCC Crossblade. 2013 Dodge CHARGER has automatic transmission and 2002 MCC Crossblade has manual transmission. 2002 MCC Crossblade will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2013 Dodge CHARGER will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.

Compare all specifications: