1946 Alfa Romeo 6C vs. 2005 MCC Crossblade
To start off, 2005 MCC Crossblade is newer by 59 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1946 Alfa Romeo 6C. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1946 Alfa Romeo 6C would be higher. At 2,443 cc (6 cylinders), 1946 Alfa Romeo 6C is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1946 Alfa Romeo 6C (89 HP) has 19 more horse power than 2005 MCC Crossblade. (70 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1946 Alfa Romeo 6C should accelerate faster than 2005 MCC Crossblade. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1946 Alfa Romeo 6C weights approximately 756 kg more than 2005 MCC Crossblade. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front 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.
Compare all specifications:
1946 Alfa Romeo 6C | 2005 MCC Crossblade | |
Make | Alfa Romeo | MCC |
Model | 6C | Crossblade |
Year Released | 1946 | 2005 |
Engine Size | 2443 cc | 599 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 89 HP | 70 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Vehicle Weight | 1500 kg | 744 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4880 mm | 2630 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1840 mm | 1630 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1510 mm | 1520 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3010 mm | 1810 mm |