1966 Seat 600 vs. 2010 Ford Ka
To start off, 2010 Ford Ka is newer by 44 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Seat 600. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Seat 600 would be higher. At 1,297 cc (4 cylinders), 2010 Ford Ka is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Ford Ka (68 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 44 more horse power than 1966 Seat 600. (24 HP @ 4600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Ford Ka should accelerate faster than 1966 Seat 600.
Because 1966 Seat 600 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 Seat 600. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Ford Ka, 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. Let's talk about torque, 2010 Ford Ka (106 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 59 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 Seat 600. (47 Nm @ 2500 RPM). This means 2010 Ford Ka will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1966 Seat 600.
Compare all specifications:
1966 Seat 600 | 2010 Ford Ka | |
Make | Seat | Ford |
Model | 600 | Ka |
Year Released | 1966 | 2010 |
Engine Position | Rear | Front |
Engine Size | 765 cc | 1297 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 24 HP | 68 HP |
Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 5500 RPM |
Torque | 47 Nm | 106 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2500 RPM | 3000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Vehicle Length | 3300 mm | 3630 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1390 mm | 1830 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1360 mm | 1390 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2010 mm | 2450 mm |