1963 Rover P5 vs. 2003 Ford Ecosport
To start off, 2003 Ford Ecosport is newer by 40 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Rover P5. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Rover P5 would be higher. At 2,993 cc (6 cylinders), 1963 Rover P5 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Ford Ecosport (143 HP) has 24 more horse power than 1963 Rover P5. (119 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2003 Ford Ecosport should accelerate faster than 1963 Rover P5.
Because 1963 Rover P5 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 Rover P5. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Ford Ecosport, 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 Rover P5 | 2003 Ford Ecosport | |
| Make | Rover | Ford |
| Model | P5 | Ecosport |
| Year Released | 1963 | 2003 |
| Body Type | Coupe | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2993 cc | 2000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 119 HP | 143 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4750 mm | 4228 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 1980 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1480 mm | 1679 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2820 mm | 2490 mm |
