1966 BMW 2000 vs. 2009 Dodge Dakota
To start off, 2009 Dodge Dakota is newer by 43 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 BMW 2000. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 BMW 2000 would be higher. At 3,701 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Dodge Dakota is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Dodge Dakota (207 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 106 more horse power than 1966 BMW 2000. (101 HP @ 5500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Dodge Dakota should accelerate faster than 1966 BMW 2000.
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, 2009 Dodge Dakota (236 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 79 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 BMW 2000. (157 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2009 Dodge Dakota will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1966 BMW 2000.
Compare all specifications:
1966 BMW 2000 | 2009 Dodge Dakota | |
Make | BMW | Dodge |
Model | 2000 | Dakota |
Year Released | 1966 | 2009 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1991 cc | 3701 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 101 HP | 207 HP |
Engine RPM | 5500 RPM | 5200 RPM |
Torque | 157 Nm | 236 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 89 mm | 87.9 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 80 mm | 100 mm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 5560 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1830 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1750 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2560 mm | 3340 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 54 L | 83 L |