1966 Alvis TF vs. 2000 BMW Z3
To start off, 2000 BMW Z3 is newer by 34 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Alvis TF. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Alvis TF would be higher. At 2,993 cc (6 cylinders), 1966 Alvis TF is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 BMW Z3 (227 HP @ 5900 RPM) has 77 more horse power than 1966 Alvis TF. (150 HP @ 4750 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2000 BMW Z3 should accelerate faster than 1966 Alvis TF.
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, 2000 BMW Z3 (300 Nm @ 3500 RPM) has 53 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 Alvis TF. (247 Nm @ 3750 RPM). This means 2000 BMW Z3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1966 Alvis TF.
Compare all specifications:
| 1966 Alvis TF | 2000 BMW Z3 | |
| Make | Alvis | BMW |
| Model | TF | Z3 |
| Year Released | 1966 | 2000 |
| Body Type | Convertible | Convertible |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2993 cc | 2926 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 150 HP | 227 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4750 RPM | 5900 RPM |
| Torque | 247 Nm | 300 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3750 RPM | 3500 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.0:1 | 10.2:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4810 mm | 4060 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1680 mm | 1750 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1300 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2840 mm | 2450 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 51 L |
