1966 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud vs. 2010 Chevrolet Cobalt
To start off, 2010 Chevrolet Cobalt is newer by 44 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. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1966 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud weights approximately 839 kg more than 2010 Chevrolet Cobalt.
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, 2010 Chevrolet Cobalt, 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 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud | 2010 Chevrolet Cobalt | |
Make | Rolls-Royce | Chevrolet |
Model | Silver Cloud | Cobalt |
Year Released | 1966 | 2010 |
Body Type | Sedan | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 6230 cc | 2201 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 155 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 2100 kg | 1261 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5380 mm | 4590 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1910 mm | 1730 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1630 mm | 1460 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3130 mm | 2630 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 15.2 L/100km | 8.9 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 81 L | 49 L |