1966 Ford 12 M vs. 1964 Zastava 1500
To start off, 1966 Ford 12 M is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Zastava 1500. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Zastava 1500 would be higher. At 1,496 cc (4 cylinders), 1966 Ford 12 M is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, both vehicles can yield 53 horse power. So under normal driving conditions, the acceleration of both vehicles should be relatively similar. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1964 Zastava 1500 weights approximately 109 kg more than 1966 Ford 12 M.
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, 1966 Ford 12 M (105 Nm @ 2500 RPM) has 12 more torque (in Nm) than 1964 Zastava 1500. (93 Nm @ 3200 RPM). This means 1966 Ford 12 M will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1964 Zastava 1500.
Compare all specifications:
| 1966 Ford 12 M | 1964 Zastava 1500 | |
| Make | Ford | Zastava |
| Model | 12 M | 1500 |
| Year Released | 1966 | 1964 |
| Engine Size | 1496 cc | 1295 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 53 HP | 53 HP |
| Torque | 105 Nm | 93 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2500 RPM | 3200 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 875 kg | 984 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4320 mm | 4040 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1610 mm | 1550 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1410 mm | 1450 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2530 mm | 2430 mm |
