1951 Bristol 450 vs. 2000 Jeep Grand Cherokee
To start off, 2000 Jeep Grand Cherokee is newer by 49 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1951 Bristol 450. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1951 Bristol 450 would be higher. At 3,960 cc (6 cylinders), 2000 Jeep Grand Cherokee is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Jeep Grand Cherokee (195 HP @ 4600 RPM) has 42 more horse power than 1951 Bristol 450. (153 HP @ 5500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2000 Jeep Grand Cherokee should accelerate faster than 1951 Bristol 450. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Jeep Grand Cherokee weights approximately 986 kg more than 1951 Bristol 450. 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:
1951 Bristol 450 | 2000 Jeep Grand Cherokee | |
Make | Bristol | Jeep |
Model | 450 | Grand Cherokee |
Year Released | 1951 | 2000 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1971 cc | 3960 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 153 HP | 195 HP |
Engine RPM | 5500 RPM | 4600 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 66 mm | 98.3 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 96 mm | 86.6 mm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 4 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 730 kg | 1716 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4480 mm | 4620 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1660 mm | 1840 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1530 mm | 1770 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2480 mm | 2700 mm |