1963 AC Aceca vs. 2000 BMW 316
To start off, 2000 BMW 316 is newer by 37 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 AC Aceca. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 AC Aceca would be higher. At 1,971 cc (6 cylinders), 1963 AC Aceca is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1963 AC Aceca (123 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 18 more horse power than 2000 BMW 316. (105 HP @ 5500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1963 AC Aceca should accelerate faster than 2000 BMW 316. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 BMW 316 weights approximately 416 kg more than 1963 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, 1963 AC Aceca (167 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 17 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 BMW 316. (150 Nm @ 3900 RPM). This means 1963 AC Aceca will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 BMW 316.
Compare all specifications:
1963 AC Aceca | 2000 BMW 316 | |
Make | AC | BMW |
Model | Aceca | 316 |
Year Released | 1963 | 2000 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1971 cc | 1596 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 123 HP | 105 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5500 RPM |
Torque | 167 Nm | 150 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 3900 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 894 kg | 1310 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4070 mm | 4480 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1560 mm | 1750 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1330 mm | 1410 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2290 mm | 2730 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 59 L | 63 L |