1965 Sunbeam Tiger vs. 2011 Chevrolet Orlando
To start off, 2011 Chevrolet Orlando is newer by 46 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 Sunbeam Tiger. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 Sunbeam Tiger would be higher. At 4,261 cc (8 cylinders), 1965 Sunbeam Tiger is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2011 Chevrolet Orlando (174 HP @ 6700 RPM) has 11 more horse power than 1965 Sunbeam Tiger. (163 HP @ 4400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2011 Chevrolet Orlando should accelerate faster than 1965 Sunbeam Tiger. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2011 Chevrolet Orlando weights approximately 460 kg more than 1965 Sunbeam Tiger. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2011 Chevrolet Orlando is all wheel drive (AWD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1965 Sunbeam Tiger. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2011 Chevrolet Orlando will offer significantly more control. 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:
| 1965 Sunbeam Tiger | 2011 Chevrolet Orlando | |
| Make | Sunbeam | Chevrolet |
| Model | Tiger | Orlando |
| Year Released | 1965 | 2011 |
| Body Type | Roadster | Crossover |
| Engine Size | 4261 cc | 2384 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 163 HP | 174 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4400 RPM | 6700 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | AWD |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1140 kg | 1600 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3970 mm | 4652 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1570 mm | 1836 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1310 mm | 1633 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2190 mm | 2760 mm |
