1978 Chrysler 160 vs. 1966 Lotus Elan
To start off, 1978 Chrysler 160 is newer by 12 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Lotus Elan. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Lotus Elan would be higher. At 1,639 cc (4 cylinders), 1978 Chrysler 160 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1966 Lotus Elan (115 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 26 more horse power than 1978 Chrysler 160. (89 HP @ 5800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1966 Lotus Elan should accelerate faster than 1978 Chrysler 160. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1978 Chrysler 160 weights approximately 389 kg more than 1966 Lotus Elan.
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, 1966 Lotus Elan (147 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 14 more torque (in Nm) than 1978 Chrysler 160. (133 Nm @ 3400 RPM). This means 1966 Lotus Elan will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1978 Chrysler 160.
Compare all specifications:
| 1978 Chrysler 160 | 1966 Lotus Elan | |
| Make | Chrysler | Lotus |
| Model | 160 | Elan |
| Year Released | 1978 | 1966 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1639 cc | 1557 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 89 HP | 115 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5800 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 133 Nm | 147 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3400 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1085 kg | 696 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4540 mm | 3700 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1730 mm | 1430 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1440 mm | 1180 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 2140 mm |
