1951 GAZ M-20 vs. 2003 MCC Smart
To start off, 2003 MCC Smart is newer by 52 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1951 GAZ M-20. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1951 GAZ M-20 would be higher. At 2,120 cc (4 cylinders), 1951 GAZ M-20 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 MCC Smart (81 HP @ 5250 RPM) has 30 more horse power than 1951 GAZ M-20. (51 HP @ 3600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2003 MCC Smart should accelerate faster than 1951 GAZ M-20. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1951 GAZ M-20 weights approximately 640 kg more than 2003 MCC Smart.
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, 1951 GAZ M-20 (125 Nm @ 2200 RPM) has 13 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 MCC Smart. (112 Nm @ 2250 RPM). This means 1951 GAZ M-20 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 MCC Smart.
Compare all specifications:
| 1951 GAZ M-20 | 2003 MCC Smart | |
| Make | GAZ | MCC |
| Model | M-20 | Smart |
| Year Released | 1951 | 2003 |
| Engine Size | 2120 cc | 698 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 51 HP | 81 HP |
| Engine RPM | 3600 RPM | 5250 RPM |
| Torque | 125 Nm | 112 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2200 RPM | 2250 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 1460 kg | 820 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4670 mm | 3440 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1900 mm | 1630 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1650 mm | 1200 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2710 mm | 2370 mm |
