1965 Mini MK I vs. 2003 Subaru R2
To start off, 2003 Subaru R2 is newer by 38 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 Mini MK I. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 Mini MK I would be higher. At 846 cc (4 cylinders), 1965 Mini MK I is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Subaru R2 (52 HP @ 6400 RPM) has 18 more horse power than 1965 Mini MK I. (34 HP @ 5500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2003 Subaru R2 should accelerate faster than 1965 Mini MK I. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Subaru R2 weights approximately 165 kg more than 1965 Mini MK I. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear 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, 2003 Subaru R2 (63 Nm @ 4400 RPM) has 3 more torque (in Nm) than 1965 Mini MK I. (60 Nm @ 2900 RPM). This means 2003 Subaru R2 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1965 Mini MK I.
Compare all specifications:
1965 Mini MK I | 2003 Subaru R2 | |
Make | Mini | Subaru |
Model | MK I | R2 |
Year Released | 1965 | 2003 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 846 cc | 658 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 34 HP | 52 HP |
Engine RPM | 5500 RPM | 6400 RPM |
Torque | 60 Nm | 63 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2900 RPM | 4400 RPM |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Vehicle Weight | 615 kg | 780 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3060 mm | 3400 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1420 mm | 1480 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1360 mm | 1530 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2040 mm | 2370 mm |