1982 Chrysler E vs. 2004 Ford C-MAX
To start off, 2004 Ford C-MAX is newer by 22 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Chrysler E. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Chrysler E would be higher. At 2,555 cc (4 cylinders), 1982 Chrysler E is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Ford C-MAX (114 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 21 more horse power than 1982 Chrysler E. (93 HP @ 4500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2004 Ford C-MAX should accelerate faster than 1982 Chrysler E. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Ford C-MAX weights approximately 168 kg more than 1982 Chrysler E. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear 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, 1982 Chrysler E (179 Nm) has 19 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Ford C-MAX. (160 Nm). This means 1982 Chrysler E will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Ford C-MAX.
Compare all specifications:
1982 Chrysler E | 2004 Ford C-MAX | |
Make | Chrysler | Ford |
Model | E | C-MAX |
Year Released | 1982 | 2004 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2555 cc | 1596 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 93 HP | 114 HP |
Engine RPM | 4500 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 179 Nm | 160 Nm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Vehicle Weight | 1206 kg | 1374 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4720 mm | 4340 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1740 mm | 1830 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1600 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2630 mm | 2650 mm |