1956 Buick 40 vs. 2002 Opel Omega
To start off, 2002 Opel Omega is newer by 46 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 104 more horse power than 2002 Opel Omega. (148 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1956 Buick 40 should accelerate faster than 2002 Opel Omega. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2002 Opel Omega weights approximately 70 kg more than 1956 Buick 40.
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, 1956 Buick 40 (462 Nm @ 3200 RPM) has 162 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 Opel Omega. (300 Nm @ 1700 RPM). This means 1956 Buick 40 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 Opel Omega.
Compare all specifications:
1956 Buick 40 | 2002 Opel Omega | |
Make | Buick | Opel |
Model | 40 | Omega |
Year Released | 1956 | 2002 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5279 cc | 2497 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 252 HP | 148 HP |
Engine RPM | 4400 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Torque | 462 Nm | 300 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3200 RPM | 1700 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 101.6 mm | 80.1 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 81.4 mm | 82.8 mm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1590 kg | 1660 kg |
Vehicle Width | 1950 mm | 1790 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3110 mm | 2740 mm |