1965 Alfa Romeo Giulia vs. 2004 MCC Crossblade
To start off, 2004 MCC Crossblade is newer by 39 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 Alfa Romeo Giulia. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 Alfa Romeo Giulia would be higher. At 1,568 cc (4 cylinders), 1965 Alfa Romeo Giulia is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1965 Alfa Romeo Giulia (168 HP) has 98 more horse power than 2004 MCC Crossblade. (70 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1965 Alfa Romeo Giulia should accelerate faster than 2004 MCC Crossblade. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 MCC Crossblade weights approximately 110 kg more than 1965 Alfa Romeo Giulia.
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, 1965 Alfa Romeo Giulia (220 Nm) has 118 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 MCC Crossblade. (102 Nm). This means 1965 Alfa Romeo Giulia will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 MCC Crossblade.
Compare all specifications:
| 1965 Alfa Romeo Giulia | 2004 MCC Crossblade | |
| Make | Alfa Romeo | MCC |
| Model | Giulia | Crossblade |
| Year Released | 1965 | 2004 |
| Engine Size | 1568 cc | 599 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 168 HP | 70 HP |
| Torque | 220 Nm | 102 Nm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 630 kg | 740 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3690 mm | 2630 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1610 mm | 1630 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1030 mm | 1520 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2260 mm | 1810 mm |
