1966 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud vs. 2003 Ford Ecosport
To start off, 2003 Ford Ecosport is newer by 37 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud would be higher. At 6,230 cc (8 cylinders), 1966 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 1966 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud 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 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Ford Ecosport, 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. 1966 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud has automatic transmission and 2003 Ford Ecosport has manual transmission. 2003 Ford Ecosport will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 1966 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 1966 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud | 2003 Ford Ecosport | |
| Make | Rolls-Royce | Ford |
| Model | Silver Cloud | Ecosport |
| Year Released | 1966 | 2003 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6230 cc | 1600 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 109 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5380 mm | 4228 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1910 mm | 1980 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1630 mm | 1679 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3130 mm | 2490 mm |
