1951 Riley RM A vs. 2013 Toyota Corolla
To start off, 2013 Toyota Corolla is newer by 62 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 1,800 cc (4 cylinders), 2013 Toyota Corolla is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Toyota Corolla weights approximately 15 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, 2013 Toyota Corolla, 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 | 2013 Toyota Corolla | |
| Make | Riley | Toyota |
| Model | RM A | Corolla |
| Year Released | 1951 | 2013 |
| Engine Size | 1495 cc | 1800 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 130 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | 5-speed manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 1235 kg | 1250 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4560 mm | 4540 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1620 mm | 1760 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1550 mm | 1465 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2870 mm | 2600 mm |
