1964 Alpine A 110 vs. 1969 Riley Kestrel
To start off, 1969 Riley Kestrel is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Alpine A 110. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Alpine A 110 would be higher. At 1,275 cc (4 cylinders), 1969 Riley Kestrel is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1969 Riley Kestrel (64 HP @ 5750 RPM) has 15 more horse power than 1964 Alpine A 110. (49 HP @ 5200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1969 Riley Kestrel should accelerate faster than 1964 Alpine A 110. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1969 Riley Kestrel weights approximately 335 kg more than 1964 Alpine A 110. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 1964 Alpine A 110 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 1964 Alpine A 110. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1969 Riley Kestrel, 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:
1964 Alpine A 110 | 1969 Riley Kestrel | |
Make | Alpine | Riley |
Model | A 110 | Kestrel |
Year Released | 1964 | 1969 |
Engine Size | 956 cc | 1275 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 49 HP | 64 HP |
Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 5750 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Vehicle Weight | 575 kg | 910 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3860 mm | 3730 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1470 mm | 1540 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1140 mm | 1350 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2140 mm | 2380 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 38 L | 25 L |