1962 AC Aceca vs. 2000 Oldsmobile SS
To start off, 2000 Oldsmobile SS is newer by 38 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1962 AC Aceca. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1962 AC Aceca would be higher. At 3,791 cc (6 cylinders), 2000 Oldsmobile SS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Oldsmobile SS (202 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 34 more horse power than 1962 AC Aceca. (168 HP @ 5500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2000 Oldsmobile SS should accelerate faster than 1962 AC Aceca.
Because 1962 AC Aceca 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 1962 AC Aceca. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Oldsmobile SS, 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. Let's talk about torque, 2000 Oldsmobile SS (318 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 109 more torque (in Nm) than 1962 AC Aceca. (209 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2000 Oldsmobile SS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1962 AC Aceca.
Compare all specifications:
| 1962 AC Aceca | 2000 Oldsmobile SS | |
| Make | AC | Oldsmobile |
| Model | Aceca | SS |
| Year Released | 1962 | 2000 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2553 cc | 3791 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 168 HP | 202 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5500 RPM | 5200 RPM |
| Torque | 209 Nm | 318 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 4 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 4070 mm | 5130 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1560 mm | 1900 mm |
