1974 Chrysler 160 vs. 2006 Suzuki Reno
To start off, 2006 Suzuki Reno is newer by 32 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1974 Chrysler 160. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1974 Chrysler 160 would be higher. At 1,999 cc (4 cylinders), 2006 Suzuki Reno is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Suzuki Reno (126 HP @ 5600 RPM) has 47 more horse power than 1974 Chrysler 160. (79 HP @ 5600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Suzuki Reno should accelerate faster than 1974 Chrysler 160.
Because 1974 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 1974 Chrysler 160. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 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, 2006 Suzuki Reno (178 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 53 more torque (in Nm) than 1974 Chrysler 160. (125 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2006 Suzuki Reno will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1974 Chrysler 160.
Compare all specifications:
1974 Chrysler 160 | 2006 Suzuki Reno | |
Make | Chrysler | Suzuki |
Model | 160 | Reno |
Year Released | 1974 | 2006 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1639 cc | 1999 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 79 HP | 126 HP |
Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 5600 RPM |
Torque | 125 Nm | 178 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Vehicle Weight | 1065 kg | 1065 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4540 mm | 4300 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1730 mm | 1730 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1440 mm | 1450 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 2610 mm |