1953 Riley RM A vs. 2003 Subaru R2
To start off, 2003 Subaru R2 is newer by 50 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1953 Riley RM A. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1953 Riley RM A would be higher. At 1,496 cc (4 cylinders), 1953 Riley RM A is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1953 Riley RM A weights approximately 425 kg more than 2003 Subaru R2.
Because 1953 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 1953 Riley RM A. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Subaru R2, 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 Riley RM A | 2003 Subaru R2 | |
Make | Riley | Subaru |
Model | RM A | R2 |
Year Released | 1953 | 2003 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1496 cc | 658 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 52 HP |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1235 kg | 810 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4560 mm | 3400 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1620 mm | 1480 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1550 mm | 1530 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2870 mm | 2370 mm |