1953 Buick 40 vs. 2002 Toyota MR2
To start off, 2002 Toyota MR2 is newer by 49 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, 2002 Toyota MR2 (197 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 74 more horse power than 1953 Buick 40. (123 HP @ 3800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2002 Toyota MR2 should accelerate faster than 1953 Buick 40. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1953 Buick 40 weights approximately 55 kg more than 2002 Toyota MR2.
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, 1953 Buick 40 (304 Nm) has 134 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 Toyota MR2. (170 Nm). This means 1953 Buick 40 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 Toyota MR2.
Compare all specifications:
| 1953 Buick 40 | 2002 Toyota MR2 | |
| Make | Buick | Toyota |
| Model | 40 | MR2 |
| Year Released | 1953 | 2002 |
| Engine Position | Front | Middle |
| Engine Size | 4315 cc | 1794 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 123 HP | 197 HP |
| Engine RPM | 3800 RPM | 5200 RPM |
| Torque | 304 Nm | 170 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 1665 kg | 1610 kg |
| Vehicle Width | 1950 mm | 1710 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3090 mm | 2440 mm |
