1980 Toyota Celica vs. 1966 Triumph 2000
To start off, 1980 Toyota Celica is newer by 14 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Triumph 2000. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Triumph 2000 would be higher. At 2,366 cc (4 cylinders), 1980 Toyota Celica is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1980 Toyota Celica (96 HP @ 4800 RPM) has 5 more horse power than 1966 Triumph 2000. (91 HP @ 5000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1980 Toyota Celica should accelerate faster than 1966 Triumph 2000. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1980 Toyota Celica weights approximately 10 kg more than 1966 Triumph 2000. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 1980 Toyota Celica (175 Nm @ 2800 RPM) has 17 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 Triumph 2000. (158 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 1980 Toyota Celica will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1966 Triumph 2000.
Compare all specifications:
1980 Toyota Celica | 1966 Triumph 2000 | |
Make | Toyota | Triumph |
Model | Celica | 2000 |
Year Released | 1980 | 1966 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2366 cc | 1998 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 96 HP | 91 HP |
Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 5000 RPM |
Torque | 175 Nm | 158 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2800 RPM | 3000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1180 kg | 1170 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4380 mm | 4420 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1640 mm | 1660 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1330 mm | 1430 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2510 mm | 2700 mm |