1953 Buick 40 vs. 2000 Mercedes-Benz C
To start off, 2000 Mercedes-Benz C is newer by 47 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1953 Buick 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1953 Buick 40 would be higher. At 4,315 cc (8 cylinders), 1953 Buick 40 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Mercedes-Benz C (141 HP @ 4200 RPM) has 18 more horse power than 1953 Buick 40. (123 HP @ 3800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2000 Mercedes-Benz C should accelerate faster than 1953 Buick 40. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1953 Buick 40 weights approximately 95 kg more than 2000 Mercedes-Benz C.
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, 2000 Mercedes-Benz C (315 Nm @ 1800 RPM) has 11 more torque (in Nm) than 1953 Buick 40. (304 Nm @ 2200 RPM). This means 2000 Mercedes-Benz C will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1953 Buick 40.
Compare all specifications:
1953 Buick 40 | 2000 Mercedes-Benz C | |
Make | Buick | Mercedes-Benz |
Model | 40 | C |
Year Released | 1953 | 2000 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4315 cc | 2146 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 123 HP | 141 HP |
Engine RPM | 3800 RPM | 4200 RPM |
Torque | 304 Nm | 315 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2200 RPM | 1800 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 80.9 mm | 88 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 104.8 mm | 88.3 mm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Vehicle Weight | 1665 kg | 1570 kg |
Vehicle Width | 1950 mm | 1730 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3090 mm | 2720 mm |