1951 Riley RM A vs. 2012 Jeep Compass
To start off, 2012 Jeep Compass is newer by 61 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1951 Riley RM A. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1951 Riley RM A would be higher. At 2,000 cc (4 cylinders), 2012 Jeep Compass is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2012 Jeep Compass weights approximately 174 kg more than 1951 Riley RM A.
Because 1951 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 1951 Riley RM A. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 Jeep Compass, 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:
1951 Riley RM A | 2012 Jeep Compass | |
Make | Riley | Jeep |
Model | RM A | Compass |
Year Released | 1951 | 2012 |
Engine Size | 1495 cc | 2000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 158 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | CVT |
Vehicle Weight | 1235 kg | 1409 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4560 mm | 4448 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1620 mm | 1814 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1550 mm | 1651 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2870 mm | 2634 mm |