1952 Allard K3 vs. 1990 Ford RS 200
To start off, 1990 Ford RS 200 is newer by 38 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1952 Allard K3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1952 Allard K3 would be higher. At 3,622 cc (8 cylinders), 1952 Allard K3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1990 Ford RS 200 (250 HP @ 4800 RPM) has 155 more horse power than 1952 Allard K3. (95 HP @ 3800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1990 Ford RS 200 should accelerate faster than 1952 Allard K3.
Because 1990 Ford RS 200 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1952 Allard K3. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1990 Ford RS 200 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, 1990 Ford RS 200 (292 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 74 more torque (in Nm) than 1952 Allard K3. (218 Nm @ 1800 RPM). This means 1990 Ford RS 200 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1952 Allard K3.
Compare all specifications:
1952 Allard K3 | 1990 Ford RS 200 | |
Make | Allard | Ford |
Model | K3 | RS 200 |
Year Released | 1952 | 1990 |
Engine Position | Front | Middle |
Engine Size | 3622 cc | 1798 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 95 HP | 250 HP |
Engine RPM | 3800 RPM | 4800 RPM |
Torque | 218 Nm | 292 Nm |
Torque RPM | 1800 RPM | 4500 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 77.8 mm | 86.1 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 95.3 mm | 77.7 mm |
Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 3 seats | 2 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1180 kg | 1180 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 4000 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1680 mm | 1770 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1380 mm | 1330 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2550 mm | 2520 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 59 L | 54 L |