2003 Acura RSX vs. 1996 Rover 400
To start off, 2003 Acura RSX is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Rover 400. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Rover 400 would be higher. At 1,998 cc (4 cylinders), 2003 Acura RSX is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Acura RSX (160 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 51 more horse power than 1996 Rover 400. (109 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2003 Acura RSX should accelerate faster than 1996 Rover 400.
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, 2003 Acura RSX (191 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 46 more torque (in Nm) than 1996 Rover 400. (145 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2003 Acura RSX will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1996 Rover 400.
Compare all specifications:
| 2003 Acura RSX | 1996 Rover 400 | |
| Make | Acura | Rover |
| Model | RSX | 400 |
| Year Released | 2003 | 1996 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1998 cc | 1589 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 160 HP | 109 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 191 Nm | 145 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 3000 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 86 mm | 80 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 86 mm | 79 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.8:1 | 10.5:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 4380 mm | 4370 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1730 mm | 1690 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1410 mm | 1410 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2540 mm | 2560 mm |
