1966 DAF Daffodil vs. 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee
To start off, 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee is newer by 37 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 DAF Daffodil. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 DAF Daffodil would be higher. At 3,960 cc (6 cylinders), 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee (195 HP @ 4600 RPM) has 169 more horse power than 1966 DAF Daffodil. (26 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee should accelerate faster than 1966 DAF Daffodil. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee weights approximately 1050 kg more than 1966 DAF Daffodil. 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 1966 DAF Daffodil | 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee | |
| Make | DAF | Jeep |
| Model | Daffodil | Grand Cherokee |
| Year Released | 1966 | 2003 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 746 cc | 3960 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 2 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 26 HP | 195 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 4600 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 666 kg | 1716 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3620 mm | 4620 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1450 mm | 1840 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1380 mm | 1770 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2060 mm | 2700 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 33 L | 78 L |
