1953 Hudson Super Wasp vs. 1981 Zastava 102
To start off, 1981 Zastava 102 is newer by 28 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1953 Hudson Super Wasp. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1953 Hudson Super Wasp would be higher. At 4,293 cc (6 cylinders), 1953 Hudson Super Wasp is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1953 Hudson Super Wasp (140 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 73 more horse power than 1981 Zastava 102. (67 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1953 Hudson Super Wasp should accelerate faster than 1981 Zastava 102. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1953 Hudson Super Wasp weights approximately 825 kg more than 1981 Zastava 102. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 1953 Hudson Super Wasp 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 1953 Hudson Super Wasp. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1981 Zastava 102, 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:
| 1953 Hudson Super Wasp | 1981 Zastava 102 | |
| Make | Hudson | Zastava |
| Model | Super Wasp | 102 |
| Year Released | 1953 | 1981 |
| Engine Size | 4293 cc | 1302 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 140 HP | 67 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 1599 kg | 774 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5160 mm | 3500 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1980 mm | 1550 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1530 mm | 1340 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3030 mm | 2160 mm |
