1956 Buick 40 vs. 1965 Triumph 2000
To start off, 1965 Triumph 2000 is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1956 Buick 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1956 Buick 40 would be higher. At 5,279 cc (8 cylinders), 1956 Buick 40 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1956 Buick 40 (252 HP @ 4400 RPM) has 163 more horse power than 1965 Triumph 2000. (89 HP @ 5000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1956 Buick 40 should accelerate faster than 1965 Triumph 2000. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1956 Buick 40 weights approximately 420 kg more than 1965 Triumph 2000. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 1956 Buick 40 (462 Nm @ 3200 RPM) has 304 more torque (in Nm) than 1965 Triumph 2000. (158 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 1956 Buick 40 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1965 Triumph 2000.
Compare all specifications:
| 1956 Buick 40 | 1965 Triumph 2000 | |
| Make | Buick | Triumph |
| Model | 40 | 2000 |
| Year Released | 1956 | 1965 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5279 cc | 1997 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 252 HP | 89 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4400 RPM | 5000 RPM |
| Torque | 462 Nm | 158 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3200 RPM | 3000 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 101.6 mm | 74.7 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 81.4 mm | 76 mm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1590 kg | 1170 kg |
| Vehicle Width | 1950 mm | 1660 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3110 mm | 2700 mm |
