1952 Riley RM A vs. 1989 Rover 216
To start off, 1989 Rover 216 is newer by 37 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1952 Riley RM A. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1952 Riley RM A would be higher. At 1,590 cc (4 cylinders), 1989 Rover 216 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1952 Riley RM A weights approximately 155 kg more than 1989 Rover 216.
Because 1952 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 1952 Riley RM A. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1989 Rover 216, 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 Riley RM A | 1989 Rover 216 | |
Make | Riley | Rover |
Model | RM A | 216 |
Year Released | 1952 | 1989 |
Engine Size | 1496 cc | 1590 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 114 HP |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Vehicle Weight | 1235 kg | 1080 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4560 mm | 4230 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1620 mm | 1950 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1550 mm | 1410 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2870 mm | 2550 mm |