1980 Austin Mini Metro vs. 1965 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow
To start off, 1980 Austin Mini Metro is newer by 15 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow would be higher. At 6,230 cc (8 cylinders), 1965 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1965 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow weights approximately 1346 kg more than 1980 Austin Mini Metro.
Because 1965 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow 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 1965 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1980 Austin Mini Metro, 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.
Compare all specifications:
1980 Austin Mini Metro | 1965 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow | |
Make | Austin | Rolls-Royce |
Model | Mini Metro | Silver Shadow |
Year Released | 1980 | 1965 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1257 cc | 6230 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 62 HP | 0 HP |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 3 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 754 kg | 2100 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3410 mm | 5180 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1550 mm | 1810 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1530 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2260 mm | 3040 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 31 L | 109 L |