1958 AC Ace vs. 2002 MCC Smart
To start off, 2002 MCC Smart is newer by 44 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1958 AC Ace. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1958 AC Ace would be higher. At 1,971 cc (6 cylinders), 1958 AC Ace is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1958 AC Ace (125 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 45 more horse power than 2002 MCC Smart. (80 HP @ 5250 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1958 AC Ace should accelerate faster than 2002 MCC Smart. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1958 AC Ace weights approximately 78 kg more than 2002 MCC Smart. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 1958 AC Ace (167 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 57 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 MCC Smart. (110 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 1958 AC Ace will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 MCC Smart.
Compare all specifications:
| 1958 AC Ace | 2002 MCC Smart | |
| Make | AC | MCC |
| Model | Ace | Smart |
| Year Released | 1958 | 2002 |
| Body Type | Roadster | Convertible |
| Engine Position | Front | Rear |
| Engine Size | 1971 cc | 698 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 125 HP | 80 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5250 RPM |
| Torque | 167 Nm | 110 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 3000 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 66 mm | 66.5 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 96 mm | 67 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.0:1 | 9.0:1 |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 894 kg | 816 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4010 mm | 3430 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1520 mm | 1620 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1270 mm | 1200 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2290 mm | 2370 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 59 L | 35 L |
