1969 Ford Thunderbird vs. 2010 Acura CSX
To start off, 2010 Acura CSX is newer by 41 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1969 Ford Thunderbird. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1969 Ford Thunderbird would be higher. At 7,029 cc (8 cylinders), 1969 Ford Thunderbird is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1969 Ford Thunderbird (355 HP) has 158 more horse power than 2010 Acura CSX. (197 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1969 Ford Thunderbird should accelerate faster than 2010 Acura CSX.
Because 1969 Ford Thunderbird 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 1969 Ford Thunderbird. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Acura CSX, 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. 1969 Ford Thunderbird has automatic transmission and 2010 Acura CSX has manual transmission. 2010 Acura CSX will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 1969 Ford Thunderbird will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
1969 Ford Thunderbird | 2010 Acura CSX | |
Make | Ford | Acura |
Model | Thunderbird | CSX |
Year Released | 1969 | 2010 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 7029 cc | 2000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 355 HP | 197 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Wheelbase Size | 2900 mm | 2700 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 14.7 L/100km | 6.8 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 29.4 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |