1965 AC Aceca vs. 1969 Ford Thunderbird
To start off, 1969 Ford Thunderbird is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 AC Aceca. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 AC Aceca would be higher. At 7,029 cc (8 cylinders), 1969 Ford Thunderbird is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1969 Ford Thunderbird (355 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 187 more horse power than 1965 AC Aceca. (168 HP @ 5500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1969 Ford Thunderbird should accelerate faster than 1965 AC Aceca.
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. Let's talk about torque, 1969 Ford Thunderbird (300 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 91 more torque (in Nm) than 1965 AC Aceca. (209 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 1969 Ford Thunderbird will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1965 AC Aceca.
Compare all specifications:
| 1965 AC Aceca | 1969 Ford Thunderbird | |
| Make | AC | Ford |
| Model | Aceca | Thunderbird |
| Year Released | 1965 | 1969 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2552 cc | 7029 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 168 HP | 355 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5500 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Torque | 209 Nm | 300 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.0:1 | 10.5:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Wheelbase Size | 2290 mm | 2900 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 54 L | 91 L |
