2003 Daihatsu YRV vs. 2012 SsangYong Rodius
To start off, 2012 SsangYong Rodius is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Daihatsu YRV. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Daihatsu YRV would be higher. At 2,696 cc (5 cylinders), 2012 SsangYong Rodius is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 SsangYong Rodius (163 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 78 more horse power than 2003 Daihatsu YRV. (85 HP @ 5800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 SsangYong Rodius should accelerate faster than 2003 Daihatsu YRV. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2012 SsangYong Rodius weights approximately 1033 kg more than 2003 Daihatsu YRV. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2003 Daihatsu YRV is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2012 SsangYong Rodius. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Daihatsu YRV will offer significantly more control. 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, 2012 SsangYong Rodius (340 Nm @ 2400 RPM) has 220 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Daihatsu YRV. (120 Nm @ 3200 RPM). This means 2012 SsangYong Rodius will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Daihatsu YRV. 2012 SsangYong Rodius has automatic transmission and 2003 Daihatsu YRV has manual transmission. 2003 Daihatsu YRV will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2012 SsangYong Rodius will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2003 Daihatsu YRV | 2012 SsangYong Rodius | |
| Make | Daihatsu | SsangYong |
| Model | YRV | Rodius |
| Year Released | 2003 | 2012 |
| Body Type | Hatchback | Minivan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1298 cc | 2696 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 5 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 85 HP | 163 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5800 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Torque | 120 Nm | 340 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3200 RPM | 2400 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 72 mm | 86.3 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 79.7 mm | 92.4 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 11.0:1 | 18.0:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 890 kg | 1923 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3770 mm | 5130 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1630 mm | 1830 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1560 mm | 1920 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2360 mm | 3010 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 4.8 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 36 L | 80 L |
