1967 Peugeot 204 vs. 1952 Riley RM A
To start off, 1967 Peugeot 204 is newer by 15 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1952 Riley RM A. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1952 Riley RM A would be higher. At 1,496 cc (4 cylinders), 1952 Riley RM A is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1952 Riley RM A weights approximately 355 kg more than 1967 Peugeot 204.
Because 1952 Riley RM A 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 1952 Riley RM A. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1967 Peugeot 204, 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 Peugeot 204 | 1952 Riley RM A | |
| Make | Peugeot | Riley |
| Model | 204 | RM A |
| Year Released | 1967 | 1952 |
| Engine Size | 1130 cc | 1496 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 47 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 880 kg | 1235 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4000 mm | 4560 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1570 mm | 1620 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1410 mm | 1550 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2610 mm | 2870 mm |
