1951 Buick 40 vs. 2010 Toyota Tundra
To start off, 2010 Toyota Tundra is newer by 59 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1951 Buick 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1951 Buick 40 would be higher. At 4,664 cc (8 cylinders), 2010 Toyota Tundra is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Toyota Tundra (276 HP @ 5400 RPM) has 157 more horse power than 1951 Buick 40. (119 HP @ 3600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Toyota Tundra should accelerate faster than 1951 Buick 40. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1951 Buick 40 weights approximately 555 kg more than 2010 Toyota Tundra.
Because 2010 Toyota Tundra is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1951 Buick 40. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Toyota Tundra will offer significantly more control. 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, 2010 Toyota Tundra (424 Nm @ 3400 RPM) has 132 more torque (in Nm) than 1951 Buick 40. (292 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 2010 Toyota Tundra will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1951 Buick 40.
Compare all specifications:
1951 Buick 40 | 2010 Toyota Tundra | |
Make | Buick | Toyota |
Model | 40 | Tundra |
Year Released | 1951 | 2010 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4066 cc | 4664 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 119 HP | 276 HP |
Engine RPM | 3600 RPM | 5400 RPM |
Torque | 292 Nm | 424 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 3400 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 3 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1635 kg | 1080 kg |
Vehicle Width | 1950 mm | 2040 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3090 mm | 3230 mm |