2006 Acura CSX vs. 2013 Jeep Compass
To start off, 2013 Jeep Compass is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Acura CSX. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Acura CSX would be higher. At 2,400 cc (4 cylinders), 2013 Jeep Compass is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Acura CSX (197 HP) has 27 more horse power than 2013 Jeep Compass. (170 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Acura CSX should accelerate faster than 2013 Jeep Compass. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Jeep Compass weights approximately 207 kg more than 2006 Acura CSX.
Because 2013 Jeep Compass is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2006 Acura CSX. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2013 Jeep Compass 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.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Acura CSX | 2013 Jeep Compass | |
Make | Acura | Jeep |
Model | CSX | Compass |
Year Released | 2006 | 2013 |
Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2000 cc | 2400 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 197 HP | 170 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
Transmission Type | Manual | CVT |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1313 kg | 1520 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4544 mm | 4448 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1752 mm | 1811 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1435 mm | 1651 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2700 mm | 2634 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 6.8 L/100km | 7.7 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 10.2 L/100km | 9.9 L/100km |