1968 Ford Fairlane vs. 2004 Mitsubishi L 200
To start off, 2004 Mitsubishi L 200 is newer by 36 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1968 Ford Fairlane. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1968 Ford Fairlane would be higher. At 2,782 cc (6 cylinders), 1968 Ford Fairlane is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Mitsubishi L 200 (110 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 29 more horse power than 1968 Ford Fairlane. (81 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2004 Mitsubishi L 200 should accelerate faster than 1968 Ford Fairlane. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Mitsubishi L 200 weights approximately 410 kg more than 1968 Ford Fairlane. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2004 Mitsubishi L 200 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1968 Ford Fairlane. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Mitsubishi L 200 will offer significantly more control. 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:
1968 Ford Fairlane | 2004 Mitsubishi L 200 | |
Make | Ford | Mitsubishi |
Model | Fairlane | L 200 |
Year Released | 1968 | 2004 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2782 cc | 2350 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 81 HP | 110 HP |
Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
Vehicle Weight | 1310 kg | 1720 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5110 mm | 5060 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1880 mm | 1710 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1390 mm | 1790 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2960 mm | 2970 mm |