1980 Audi 80 vs. 2002 MCC Crossblade
To start off, 2002 MCC Crossblade is newer by 22 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1980 Audi 80. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1980 Audi 80 would be higher. At 1,587 cc (4 cylinders), 1980 Audi 80 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 MCC Crossblade (70 HP) has 17 more horse power than 1980 Audi 80. (53 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2002 MCC Crossblade should accelerate faster than 1980 Audi 80. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1980 Audi 80 weights approximately 240 kg more than 2002 MCC Crossblade.
Because 2002 MCC Crossblade 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 2002 MCC Crossblade. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1980 Audi 80, 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, 1980 Audi 80 (104 Nm @ 2000 RPM) has 2 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 MCC Crossblade. (102 Nm @ 3210 RPM). This means 1980 Audi 80 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 MCC Crossblade.
Compare all specifications:
1980 Audi 80 | 2002 MCC Crossblade | |
Make | Audi | MCC |
Model | 80 | Crossblade |
Year Released | 1980 | 2002 |
Engine Size | 1587 cc | 599 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 53 HP | 70 HP |
Torque | 104 Nm | 102 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 3210 RPM |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Vehicle Weight | 980 kg | 740 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4390 mm | 2630 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1690 mm | 1630 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1380 mm | 1520 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2550 mm | 1810 mm |