1963 AC Cobra vs. 2002 Toyota ES 3
To start off, 2002 Toyota ES 3 is newer by 39 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. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1963 AC Cobra weights approximately 350 kg more than 2002 Toyota ES 3.
Because 1963 AC Cobra 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 1963 AC Cobra. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2002 Toyota ES 3, 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 1963 AC Cobra | 2002 Toyota ES 3 | |
| Make | AC | Toyota |
| Model | Cobra | ES 3 |
| Year Released | 1963 | 2002 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4727 cc | 1364 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 271 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Vehicle Weight | 1050 kg | 700 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3850 mm | 3530 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1560 mm | 1640 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1250 mm | 1470 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2290 mm | 2320 mm |
