1978 Buick Regal vs. 2000 Caterham 7
To start off, 2000 Caterham 7 is newer by 22 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1978 Buick Regal. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1978 Buick Regal would be higher. At 3,214 cc (6 cylinders), 1978 Buick Regal is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Caterham 7 (170 HP @ 10750 RPM) has 80 more horse power than 1978 Buick Regal. (90 HP @ 3600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2000 Caterham 7 should accelerate faster than 1978 Buick Regal. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1978 Buick Regal weights approximately 990 kg more than 2000 Caterham 7.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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, 1978 Buick Regal (224 Nm @ 2000 RPM) has 99 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Caterham 7. (125 Nm @ 8250 RPM). This means 1978 Buick Regal will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Caterham 7.
Compare all specifications:
| 1978 Buick Regal | 2000 Caterham 7 | |
| Make | Buick | Caterham |
| Model | Regal | 7 |
| Year Released | 1978 | 2000 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3214 cc | 1137 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 90 HP | 170 HP |
| Engine RPM | 3600 RPM | 10750 RPM |
| Torque | 224 Nm | 125 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 8250 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1430 kg | 440 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5090 mm | 3110 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1840 mm | 1580 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1010 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2750 mm | 2260 mm |
