1952 Buick 40 vs. 2009 Dodge Dakota
To start off, 2009 Dodge Dakota is newer by 57 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, 2009 Dodge Dakota (207 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 89 more horse power than 1952 Buick 40. (118 HP @ 3600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Dodge Dakota should accelerate faster than 1952 Buick 40.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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, 1952 Buick 40 (292 Nm @ 2000 RPM) has 56 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Dodge Dakota. (236 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 1952 Buick 40 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Dodge Dakota.
Compare all specifications:
| 1952 Buick 40 | 2009 Dodge Dakota | |
| Make | Buick | Dodge |
| Model | 40 | Dakota |
| Year Released | 1952 | 2009 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4066 cc | 3701 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 118 HP | 207 HP |
| Engine RPM | 3600 RPM | 5200 RPM |
| Torque | 292 Nm | 236 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 78.6 mm | 87.9 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 104.8 mm | 100 mm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Width | 1950 mm | 1830 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3090 mm | 3340 mm |
