1967 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow vs. 2013 Chevrolet Equinox
To start off, 2013 Chevrolet Equinox is newer by 46 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1967 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1967 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow would be higher. At 6,230 cc (8 cylinders), 1967 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1967 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow weights approximately 401 kg more than 2013 Chevrolet Equinox.
Because 1967 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow 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 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2013 Chevrolet Equinox, 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 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow | 2013 Chevrolet Equinox | |
Make | Rolls-Royce | Chevrolet |
Model | Silver Shadow | Equinox |
Year Released | 1967 | 2013 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 6230 cc | 2400 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 180 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Flex Fuel |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 2106 kg | 1705 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5180 mm | 4771 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1810 mm | 1842 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1530 mm | 1760 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3040 mm | 2857 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 109 L | 71 L |