2005 Acura RSX vs. 2010 Kia Rondo
To start off, 2010 Kia Rondo is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Acura RSX. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Acura RSX would be higher. At 2,399 cc (4 cylinders), 2010 Kia Rondo is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Acura RSX (210 HP @ 5600 RPM) has 37 more horse power than 2010 Kia Rondo. (173 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2005 Acura RSX should accelerate faster than 2010 Kia Rondo. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2010 Kia Rondo weights approximately 259 kg more than 2005 Acura RSX.
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, 2005 Acura RSX (194 Nm) has 25 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Kia Rondo. (169 Nm). This means 2005 Acura RSX will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Kia Rondo.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Acura RSX | 2010 Kia Rondo | |
Make | Acura | Kia |
Model | RSX | Rondo |
Year Released | 2005 | 2010 |
Body Type | Coupe | Minivan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1998 cc | 2399 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 210 HP | 173 HP |
Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 194 Nm | 169 Nm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 11.0:1 | 17.7:1 |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1256 kg | 1515 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4390 mm | 4550 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1730 mm | 1830 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1710 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2810 mm | 2710 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 7.6 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 10.2 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 9.1 L/100km | 10.7 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 50 L | 60 L |