2004 Isuzu Rodeo vs. 2009 Scion tC
To start off, 2009 Scion tC is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Isuzu Rodeo. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Isuzu Rodeo would be higher. At 3,163 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Isuzu Rodeo is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Isuzu Rodeo (205 HP) has 44 more horse power than 2009 Scion tC. (161 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Isuzu Rodeo should accelerate faster than 2009 Scion tC. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Isuzu Rodeo weights approximately 545 kg more than 2009 Scion tC. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2004 Isuzu Rodeo is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2009 Scion tC. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Isuzu Rodeo 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, 2004 Isuzu Rodeo (290 Nm) has 70 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Scion tC. (220 Nm). This means 2004 Isuzu Rodeo will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Scion tC.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Isuzu Rodeo | 2009 Scion tC | |
Make | Isuzu | Scion |
Model | Rodeo | tC |
Year Released | 2004 | 2009 |
Body Type | SUV | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3163 cc | 2362 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 205 HP | 161 HP |
Torque | 290 Nm | 220 Nm |
Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1874 kg | 1329 kg |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 10.2 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |