1966 Ford Cortina vs. 2013 Chevrolet Equinox
To start off, 2013 Chevrolet Equinox is newer by 47 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Ford Cortina. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Ford Cortina would be higher. At 2,400 cc (4 cylinders), 2013 Chevrolet Equinox is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 1966 Ford Cortina 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 Ford Cortina. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2013 Chevrolet Equinox, 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 1966 Ford Cortina | 2013 Chevrolet Equinox | |
| Make | Ford | Chevrolet |
| Model | Cortina | Equinox |
| Year Released | 1966 | 2013 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1198 cc | 2400 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 180 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Flex Fuel |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4280 mm | 4771 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1590 mm | 1842 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1760 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2500 mm | 2857 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 71 L |
