1966 AC Cobra vs. 2003 Mitsubishi eK
To start off, 2003 Mitsubishi eK is newer by 37 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 AC Cobra. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 AC Cobra would be higher. At 6,997 cc (8 cylinders), 1966 AC Cobra is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1966 AC Cobra weights approximately 357 kg more than 2003 Mitsubishi eK.
Because 1966 AC Cobra is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 1966 AC Cobra. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Mitsubishi eK, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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. 2003 Mitsubishi eK has automatic transmission and 1966 AC Cobra has manual transmission. 1966 AC Cobra will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2003 Mitsubishi eK will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
1966 AC Cobra | 2003 Mitsubishi eK | |
Make | AC | Mitsubishi |
Model | Cobra | eK |
Year Released | 1966 | 2003 |
Body Type | Roadster | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 6997 cc | 656 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 410 HP | 0 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1147 kg | 790 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3970 mm | 3400 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1730 mm | 1480 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1250 mm | 1560 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2290 mm | 2350 mm |