1956 AC Ace vs. 2000 Chrysler ESX 3
To start off, 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 is newer by 44 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1956 AC Ace. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1956 AC Ace would be higher. At 1,971 cc (6 cylinders), 1956 AC Ace is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1956 AC Ace (123 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 49 more horse power than 2000 Chrysler ESX 3. (74 HP @ 6400 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1956 AC Ace should accelerate faster than 2000 Chrysler ESX 3. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 weights approximately 726 kg more than 1956 AC Ace.
Let's talk about torque, 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 (332 Nm) has 165 more torque (in Nm) than 1956 AC Ace. (167 Nm). This means 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1956 AC Ace. 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 has automatic transmission and 1956 AC Ace has manual transmission. 1956 AC Ace will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 1956 AC Ace | 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 | |
| Make | AC | Chrysler |
| Model | Ace | ESX 3 |
| Year Released | 1956 | 2000 |
| Body Type | Roadster | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1971 cc | 1499 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 123 HP | 74 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 6400 RPM |
| Torque | 167 Nm | 332 Nm |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 894 kg | 1620 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3850 mm | 4910 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1520 mm | 1890 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1250 mm | 1400 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2290 mm | 3000 mm |
