1956 AC Aceca vs. 2000 Ford ST 460
To start off, 2000 Ford ST 460 is newer by 44 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1956 AC Aceca. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1956 AC Aceca would be higher. At 4,600 cc (8 cylinders), 2000 Ford ST 460 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Ford ST 460 (460 HP @ 6150 RPM) has 337 more horse power than 1956 AC Aceca. (123 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2000 Ford ST 460 should accelerate faster than 1956 AC Aceca.
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, 2000 Ford ST 460 (178 Nm) has 10 more torque (in Nm) than 1956 AC Aceca. (168 Nm). This means 2000 Ford ST 460 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1956 AC Aceca.
Compare all specifications:
1956 AC Aceca | 2000 Ford ST 460 | |
Make | AC | Ford |
Model | Aceca | ST 460 |
Year Released | 1956 | 2000 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1971 cc | 4600 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 123 HP | 460 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 6150 RPM |
Torque | 168 Nm | 178 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 2 seats |
Vehicle Length | 4070 mm | 4620 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1560 mm | 1830 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2290 mm | 2580 mm |