2006 Chevrolet Kodiak vs. 2002 Honda Accord
To start off, 2006 Chevrolet Kodiak is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Honda Accord. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Honda Accord would be higher. At 6,600 cc (8 cylinders), 2006 Chevrolet Kodiak is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 2006 Chevrolet Kodiak is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2006 Chevrolet Kodiak. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2002 Honda Accord, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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, 2006 Chevrolet Kodiak (820 Nm @ 1600 RPM) has 630 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 Honda Accord. (190 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2006 Chevrolet Kodiak will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 Honda Accord.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Chevrolet Kodiak | 2002 Honda Accord | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Honda |
| Model | Kodiak | Accord |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2002 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6600 cc | 1997 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 152 HP |
| Torque | 820 Nm | 190 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 1600 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Width | 2000 mm | 1770 mm |
