1964 Ford GT 40 vs. 1980 Mitsubishi Colt
To start off, 1980 Mitsubishi Colt is newer by 16 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Ford GT 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Ford GT 40 would be higher. At 4,195 cc (8 cylinders), 1964 Ford GT 40 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1964 Ford GT 40 weights approximately 54 kg more than 1980 Mitsubishi Colt.
Because 1964 Ford GT 40 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 Ford GT 40. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1980 Mitsubishi Colt, 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 Ford GT 40 | 1980 Mitsubishi Colt | |
| Make | Ford | Mitsubishi |
| Model | GT 40 | Colt |
| Year Released | 1964 | 1980 |
| Engine Position | Middle | Front |
| Engine Size | 4195 cc | 1242 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 350 HP | 0 HP |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 864 kg | 810 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4030 mm | 3800 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1590 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1040 mm | 1360 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2420 mm | 2310 mm |
