1950 Buick 40 vs. 2002 BMW Z3
To start off, 2002 BMW Z3 is newer by 52 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1950 Buick 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1950 Buick 40 would be higher. At 4,065 cc (8 cylinders), 1950 Buick 40 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 BMW Z3 (185 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 71 more horse power than 1950 Buick 40. (114 HP @ 3600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2002 BMW Z3 should accelerate faster than 1950 Buick 40. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1950 Buick 40 weights approximately 285 kg more than 2002 BMW Z3.
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. Let's talk about torque, 1950 Buick 40 (285 Nm @ 2000 RPM) has 48 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 BMW Z3. (237 Nm @ 3500 RPM). This means 1950 Buick 40 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 BMW Z3.
Compare all specifications:
1950 Buick 40 | 2002 BMW Z3 | |
Make | Buick | BMW |
Model | 40 | Z3 |
Year Released | 1950 | 2002 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4065 cc | 2488 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 114 HP | 185 HP |
Engine RPM | 3600 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 285 Nm | 237 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 3500 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 78.5 mm | 84 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 104.8 mm | 74.9 mm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1640 kg | 1355 kg |
Vehicle Width | 1950 mm | 1750 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3090 mm | 2450 mm |