1963 AC Greyhound vs. 2002 MCC Smart
To start off, 2002 MCC Smart is newer by 39 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 AC Greyhound. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 AC Greyhound would be higher. At 1,971 cc (6 cylinders), 1963 AC Greyhound is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1963 AC Greyhound (123 HP @ 5750 RPM) has 43 more horse power than 2002 MCC Smart. (80 HP @ 5250 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1963 AC Greyhound should accelerate faster than 2002 MCC Smart. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1963 AC Greyhound weights approximately 199 kg more than 2002 MCC Smart. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 1963 AC Greyhound (179 Nm) has 69 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 MCC Smart. (110 Nm). This means 1963 AC Greyhound will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 MCC Smart.
Compare all specifications:
1963 AC Greyhound | 2002 MCC Smart | |
Make | AC | MCC |
Model | Greyhound | Smart |
Year Released | 1963 | 2002 |
Engine Position | Front | Rear |
Engine Size | 1971 cc | 698 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 123 HP | 80 HP |
Engine RPM | 5750 RPM | 5250 RPM |
Torque | 179 Nm | 110 Nm |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 2 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1015 kg | 816 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4580 mm | 3430 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1670 mm | 1620 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1340 mm | 1200 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2550 mm | 2370 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 54 L | 35 L |