1955 Buick 40 vs. 1969 Rover 2000
To start off, 1969 Rover 2000 is newer by 14 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1955 Buick 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1955 Buick 40 would be higher. At 5,277 cc (8 cylinders), 1955 Buick 40 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1955 Buick 40 (234 HP @ 4600 RPM) has 128 more horse power than 1969 Rover 2000. (106 HP @ 5500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1955 Buick 40 should accelerate faster than 1969 Rover 2000. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1955 Buick 40 weights approximately 430 kg more than 1969 Rover 2000. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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, 1955 Buick 40 (447 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 275 more torque (in Nm) than 1969 Rover 2000. (172 Nm @ 3750 RPM). This means 1955 Buick 40 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1969 Rover 2000.
Compare all specifications:
1955 Buick 40 | 1969 Rover 2000 | |
Make | Buick | Rover |
Model | 40 | 2000 |
Year Released | 1955 | 1969 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5277 cc | 1976 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 234 HP | 106 HP |
Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 5500 RPM |
Torque | 447 Nm | 172 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 3750 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Vehicle Weight | 1725 kg | 1295 kg |
Wheelbase Size | 3110 mm | 2640 mm |