1963 AC Cobra vs. 2001 BMW Compact
To start off, 2001 BMW Compact is newer by 38 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 AC Cobra. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 AC Cobra would be higher. At 4,727 cc (8 cylinders), 1963 AC Cobra is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1963 AC Cobra (271 HP @ 5750 RPM) has 78 more horse power than 2001 BMW Compact. (193 HP @ 7400 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1963 AC Cobra should accelerate faster than 2001 BMW Compact. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2001 BMW Compact weights approximately 530 kg more than 1963 AC Cobra.
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 Cobra (423 Nm) has 186 more torque (in Nm) than 2001 BMW Compact. (237 Nm). This means 1963 AC Cobra will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2001 BMW Compact.
Compare all specifications:
| 1963 AC Cobra | 2001 BMW Compact | |
| Make | AC | BMW |
| Model | Cobra | Compact |
| Year Released | 1963 | 2001 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4727 cc | 2501 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 271 HP | 193 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5750 RPM | 7400 RPM |
| Torque | 423 Nm | 237 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 4 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1050 kg | 1580 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3850 mm | 4490 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1560 mm | 1760 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1250 mm | 1370 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2290 mm | 2730 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 63 L |
