1972 Chrysler 160 vs. 2003 Ford Ecosport
To start off, 2003 Ford Ecosport is newer by 31 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1972 Chrysler 160. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1972 Chrysler 160 would be higher. At 1,639 cc (4 cylinders), 1972 Chrysler 160 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Ford Ecosport (94 HP) has 15 more horse power than 1972 Chrysler 160. (79 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2003 Ford Ecosport should accelerate faster than 1972 Chrysler 160.
Because 1972 Chrysler 160 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 Chrysler 160. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Ford Ecosport, 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:
1972 Chrysler 160 | 2003 Ford Ecosport | |
Make | Chrysler | Ford |
Model | 160 | Ecosport |
Year Released | 1972 | 2003 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1639 cc | 1000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 79 HP | 94 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Vehicle Length | 4540 mm | 4228 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1730 mm | 1980 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1440 mm | 1679 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 2490 mm |