1962 AC Aceca vs. 2006 BMW 130
To start off, 2006 BMW 130 is newer by 44 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 2,993 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 BMW 130 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 BMW 130 (261 HP @ 6600 RPM) has 93 more horse power than 1962 AC Aceca. (168 HP @ 5500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 BMW 130 should accelerate faster than 1962 AC Aceca.
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. Let's talk about torque, 2006 BMW 130 (315 Nm @ 2750 RPM) has 106 more torque (in Nm) than 1962 AC Aceca. (209 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2006 BMW 130 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1962 AC Aceca.
Compare all specifications:
| 1962 AC Aceca | 2006 BMW 130 | |
| Make | AC | BMW |
| Model | Aceca | 130 |
| Year Released | 1962 | 2006 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2553 cc | 2993 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 168 HP | 261 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5500 RPM | 6600 RPM |
| Torque | 209 Nm | 315 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 2750 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 82.6 mm | 85 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 79.5 mm | 88 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.5:1 | 10.7:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Width | 1560 mm | 1850 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 54 L | 53 L |
