1952 Buick 40 vs. 1999 Acura CL
To start off, 1999 Acura CL is newer by 47 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1952 Buick 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1952 Buick 40 would be higher. At 4,066 cc (8 cylinders), 1952 Buick 40 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1999 Acura CL (200 HP) has 82 more horse power than 1952 Buick 40. (118 HP) In normal driving conditions, 1999 Acura CL should accelerate faster than 1952 Buick 40. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1952 Buick 40 weights approximately 55 kg more than 1999 Acura CL.
Because 1952 Buick 40 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 Buick 40. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1999 Acura CL, 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 Buick 40 | 1999 Acura CL | |
| Make | Buick | Acura |
| Model | 40 | CL |
| Year Released | 1952 | 1999 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4066 cc | 3000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 118 HP | 200 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1635 kg | 1580 kg |
| Vehicle Width | 1950 mm | 1781 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3090 mm | 2715 mm |
