1959 Bristol 406 vs. 2010 Ford Ecosport
To start off, 2010 Ford Ecosport is newer by 51 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1959 Bristol 406. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1959 Bristol 406 would be higher. At 2,216 cc (6 cylinders), 1959 Bristol 406 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Ford Ecosport (109 HP) has 18 more horse power than 1959 Bristol 406. (91 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Ford Ecosport should accelerate faster than 1959 Bristol 406.
Because 1959 Bristol 406 is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 1959 Bristol 406. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Ford Ecosport, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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 Bristol 406 | 2010 Ford Ecosport | |
Make | Bristol | Ford |
Model | 406 | Ecosport |
Year Released | 1959 | 2010 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2216 cc | 1600 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 91 HP | 109 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4990 mm | 4228 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1980 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1530 mm | 1679 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2900 mm | 2490 mm |