1965 Nissan Cedric vs. 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass
To start off, 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass is newer by 15 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 Nissan Cedric. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 Nissan Cedric would be higher. At 4,343 cc (8 cylinders), 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass (120 HP @ 3600 RPM) has 60 more horse power than 1965 Nissan Cedric. (60 HP @ 5000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass should accelerate faster than 1965 Nissan Cedric. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass weights approximately 506 kg more than 1965 Nissan Cedric. 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. Let's talk about torque, 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass (305 Nm) has 190 more torque (in Nm) than 1965 Nissan Cedric. (115 Nm). This means 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1965 Nissan Cedric.
Compare all specifications:
| 1965 Nissan Cedric | 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass | |
| Make | Nissan | Oldsmobile |
| Model | Cedric | Cutlass |
| Year Released | 1965 | 1980 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1488 cc | 4343 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 60 HP | 120 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 3600 RPM |
| Torque | 115 Nm | 305 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 980 kg | 1486 kg |
| Wheelbase Size | 2540 mm | 2750 mm |
