1962 AC Cobra vs. 2011 Mazda BT-50
To start off, 2011 Mazda BT-50 is newer by 49 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1962 AC Cobra. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1962 AC Cobra would be higher. At 4,265 cc (8 cylinders), 1962 AC Cobra is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1962 AC Cobra (256 HP @ 5800 RPM) has 102 more horse power than 2011 Mazda BT-50. (154 HP @ 3200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1962 AC Cobra should accelerate faster than 2011 Mazda BT-50.
Because 2011 Mazda BT-50 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1962 AC Cobra. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2011 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. Let's talk about torque, 2011 Mazda BT-50 (380 Nm @ 180 RPM) has 15 more torque (in Nm) than 1962 AC Cobra. (365 Nm @ 4800 RPM). This means 2011 Mazda BT-50 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1962 AC Cobra.
Compare all specifications:
1962 AC Cobra | 2011 Mazda BT-50 | |
Make | AC | Mazda |
Model | Cobra | BT-50 |
Year Released | 1962 | 2011 |
Body Type | Roadster | Pickup |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4265 cc | 2953 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 256 HP | 154 HP |
Engine RPM | 5800 RPM | 3200 RPM |
Torque | 365 Nm | 380 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4800 RPM | 180 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 96.5 mm | 96.1 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 72.9 mm | 102 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 18.0:1 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 2 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Height | 1250 mm | 1810 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2290 mm | 3010 mm |