1952 BMW 340 vs. 2000 Ford Puma
To start off, 2000 Ford Puma is newer by 48 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1952 BMW 340. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1952 BMW 340 would be higher. At 1,971 cc (6 cylinders), 1952 BMW 340 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Ford Puma (153 HP @ 7000 RPM) has 100 more horse power than 1952 BMW 340. (53 HP @ 3750 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2000 Ford Puma should accelerate faster than 1952 BMW 340. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Ford Puma weights approximately 25 kg more than 1952 BMW 340. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 1952 BMW 340 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 1952 BMW 340. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Ford Puma, 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:
| 1952 BMW 340 | 2000 Ford Puma | |
| Make | BMW | Ford |
| Model | 340 | Puma |
| Year Released | 1952 | 2000 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1971 cc | 1679 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 53 HP | 153 HP |
| Engine RPM | 3750 RPM | 7000 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1250 kg | 1275 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4610 mm | 3990 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1770 mm | 1780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1640 mm | 1320 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2880 mm | 2450 mm |
