1950 Riley RM A vs. 2005 Volkswagen Polo
To start off, 2005 Volkswagen Polo is newer by 55 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1950 Riley RM A. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1950 Riley RM A would be higher. At 1,496 cc (4 cylinders), 1950 Riley RM A is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1950 Riley RM A weights approximately 140 kg more than 2005 Volkswagen Polo.
Because 1950 Riley RM A 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 1950 Riley RM A. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 Volkswagen Polo, 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 1950 Riley RM A | 2005 Volkswagen Polo | |
| Make | Riley | Volkswagen |
| Model | RM A | Polo |
| Year Released | 1950 | 2005 |
| Engine Size | 1496 cc | 1390 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 74 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 1235 kg | 1095 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4560 mm | 3900 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1620 mm | 1660 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1550 mm | 1470 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2870 mm | 2520 mm |
