1959 AC Aceca vs. 2010 Mazda BT-50
To start off, 2010 Mazda BT-50 is newer by 51 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 2,498 cc (4 cylinders), 2010 Mazda BT-50 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Mazda BT-50 (108 HP @ 3500 RPM) has 34 more horse power than 1959 AC Aceca. (74 HP @ 4500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Mazda BT-50 should accelerate faster than 1959 AC Aceca. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2010 Mazda BT-50 weights approximately 65 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.
Because 2010 Mazda BT-50 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1959 AC Aceca. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Mazda BT-50 will offer significantly more control. 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 | 2010 Mazda BT-50 | |
Make | AC | Mazda |
Model | Aceca | BT-50 |
Year Released | 1959 | 2010 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1991 cc | 2498 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 74 HP | 108 HP |
Engine RPM | 4500 RPM | 3500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 2 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 890 kg | 955 kg |
Vehicle Height | 1330 mm | 1810 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2290 mm | 3010 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 59 L | 50 L |