1960 BMW 502 vs. 2003 MCC Crossblade
To start off, 2003 MCC Crossblade is newer by 43 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1960 BMW 502. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1960 BMW 502 would be higher. At 2,580 cc (8 cylinders), 1960 BMW 502 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1960 BMW 502 (100 HP) has 30 more horse power than 2003 MCC Crossblade. (70 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1960 BMW 502 should accelerate faster than 2003 MCC Crossblade. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1960 BMW 502 weights approximately 670 kg more than 2003 MCC Crossblade. 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:
| 1960 BMW 502 | 2003 MCC Crossblade | |
| Make | BMW | MCC |
| Model | 502 | Crossblade |
| Year Released | 1960 | 2003 |
| Engine Size | 2580 cc | 598 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 100 HP | 70 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 1410 kg | 740 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4740 mm | 2630 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1630 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1540 mm | 1520 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2840 mm | 1810 mm |
