1967 Ford Fairlane vs. 1980 Seat Ritmo
To start off, 1980 Seat Ritmo is newer by 13 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1967 Ford Fairlane. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1967 Ford Fairlane would be higher. At 3,930 cc (6 cylinders), 1967 Ford Fairlane is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1967 Ford Fairlane (122 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 59 more horse power than 1980 Seat Ritmo. (63 HP @ 5800 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1967 Ford Fairlane should accelerate faster than 1980 Seat Ritmo. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1967 Ford Fairlane weights approximately 430 kg more than 1980 Seat Ritmo. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 1967 Ford Fairlane 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 1967 Ford Fairlane. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1980 Seat Ritmo, 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:
| 1967 Ford Fairlane | 1980 Seat Ritmo | |
| Make | Ford | Seat |
| Model | Fairlane | Ritmo |
| Year Released | 1967 | 1980 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3930 cc | 1197 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 122 HP | 63 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 5800 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Vehicle Weight | 1310 kg | 880 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5110 mm | 3950 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1880 mm | 1660 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1410 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2960 mm | 2460 mm |
