1978 Chrysler 160 vs. 1992 Ford Taurus
To start off, 1992 Ford Taurus is newer by 14 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1978 Chrysler 160. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1978 Chrysler 160 would be higher. At 2,986 cc (6 cylinders), 1992 Ford Taurus is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1992 Ford Taurus (220 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 131 more horse power than 1978 Chrysler 160. (89 HP @ 5800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1992 Ford Taurus should accelerate faster than 1978 Chrysler 160.
Because 1978 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 1978 Chrysler 160. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1992 Ford Taurus, 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, 1992 Ford Taurus (271 Nm @ 4800 RPM) has 138 more torque (in Nm) than 1978 Chrysler 160. (133 Nm @ 3400 RPM). This means 1992 Ford Taurus will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1978 Chrysler 160.
Compare all specifications:
| 1978 Chrysler 160 | 1992 Ford Taurus | |
| Make | Chrysler | Ford |
| Model | 160 | Taurus |
| Year Released | 1978 | 1992 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1639 cc | 2986 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 89 HP | 220 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5800 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 133 Nm | 271 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3400 RPM | 4800 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 4540 mm | 4880 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1730 mm | 1810 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1440 mm | 1380 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 2700 mm |
