1962 DAF 750 vs. 1999 Ford O21 C
To start off, 1999 Ford O21 C is newer by 37 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1962 DAF 750. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1962 DAF 750 would be higher. At 1,596 cc (4 cylinders), 1999 Ford O21 C is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1999 Ford O21 C (128 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 97 more horse power than 1962 DAF 750. (31 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1999 Ford O21 C should accelerate faster than 1962 DAF 750. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1999 Ford O21 C weights approximately 636 kg more than 1962 DAF 750. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 1962 DAF 750 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 DAF 750. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1999 Ford O21 C, 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, 1999 Ford O21 C (178 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 121 more torque (in Nm) than 1962 DAF 750. (57 Nm @ 2800 RPM). This means 1999 Ford O21 C will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1962 DAF 750.
Compare all specifications:
| 1962 DAF 750 | 1999 Ford O21 C | |
| Make | DAF | Ford |
| Model | 750 | O21 C |
| Year Released | 1962 | 1999 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 746 cc | 1596 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 2 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | boxer | in-line |
| Horse Power | 31 HP | 128 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 57 Nm | 178 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2800 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 85.5 mm | 79 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 65 mm | 81.4 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 7.1:1 | 11.0:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 662 kg | 1298 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3610 mm | 3610 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1450 mm | 1650 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1380 mm | 1440 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2060 mm | 2490 mm |
