1972 BMW 520 vs. 2005 Suzuki Reno
To start off, 2005 Suzuki Reno is newer by 33 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1972 BMW 520. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1972 BMW 520 would be higher. At 1,998 cc (4 cylinders), 2005 Suzuki Reno is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1972 BMW 520 (150 HP @ 5900 RPM) has 24 more horse power than 2005 Suzuki Reno. (126 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1972 BMW 520 should accelerate faster than 2005 Suzuki Reno. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1972 BMW 520 weights approximately 183 kg more than 2005 Suzuki Reno. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 1972 BMW 520 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 1972 BMW 520. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 Suzuki Reno, 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. Let's talk about torque, 1972 BMW 520 (190 Nm) has 12 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Suzuki Reno. (178 Nm). This means 1972 BMW 520 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Suzuki Reno.
Compare all specifications:
1972 BMW 520 | 2005 Suzuki Reno | |
Make | BMW | Suzuki |
Model | 520 | Reno |
Year Released | 1972 | 2005 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1991 cc | 1998 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 150 HP | 126 HP |
Engine RPM | 5900 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 190 Nm | 178 Nm |
Engine Bore Size | 80 mm | 86 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 66 mm | 86 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 11.0:1 | 9.6:1 |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1445 kg | 1262 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4630 mm | 4300 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1700 mm | 1730 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1450 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2770 mm | 2610 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 7.3 L/100km | 7.8 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 12.4 L/100km | 10.7 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 9.2 L/100km | 9.4 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 80 L | 55 L |