1964 Alpine A vs. 1963 Rover 2000
To start off, 1964 Alpine A is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Rover 2000. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Rover 2000 would be higher. At 1,978 cc (4 cylinders), 1963 Rover 2000 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1963 Rover 2000 (91 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 32 more horse power than 1964 Alpine A. (59 HP @ 6500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1963 Rover 2000 should accelerate faster than 1964 Alpine A. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1963 Rover 2000 weights approximately 637 kg more than 1964 Alpine A. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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.
Compare all specifications:
1964 Alpine A | 1963 Rover 2000 | |
Make | Alpine | Rover |
Model | A | 2000 |
Year Released | 1964 | 1963 |
Engine Position | Rear | Front |
Engine Size | 1106 cc | 1978 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 59 HP | 91 HP |
Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 5200 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 575 kg | 1212 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3860 mm | 4560 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1470 mm | 1680 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1140 mm | 1410 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2110 mm | 2630 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 62 L | 54 L |