1959 AC Aceca vs. 1996 Renault Clio
To start off, 1996 Renault Clio is newer by 37 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1959 AC Aceca. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1959 AC Aceca would be higher. At 3,000 cc (6 cylinders), 1996 Renault Clio is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1996 Renault Clio (250 HP) has 176 more horse power than 1959 AC Aceca. (74 HP) In normal driving conditions, 1996 Renault Clio should accelerate faster than 1959 AC Aceca. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1996 Renault Clio weights approximately 760 kg more than 1959 AC Aceca. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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.
Compare all specifications:
| 1959 AC Aceca | 1996 Renault Clio | |
| Make | AC | Renault |
| Model | Aceca | Clio |
| Year Released | 1959 | 1996 |
| Engine Position | Front | Middle |
| Engine Size | 1991 cc | 3000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 74 HP | 250 HP |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 4 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 890 kg | 1650 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4070 mm | 3780 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1560 mm | 1640 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1330 mm | 1420 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2290 mm | 2490 mm |
