1983 Bristol Beaufighter vs. 1965 Ford Zodiac
To start off, 1983 Bristol Beaufighter is newer by 18 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 Ford Zodiac. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 Ford Zodiac would be higher. At 5,896 cc (8 cylinders), 1983 Bristol Beaufighter is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1983 Bristol Beaufighter weights approximately 480 kg more than 1965 Ford Zodiac.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front 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. 1983 Bristol Beaufighter has automatic transmission and 1965 Ford Zodiac has manual transmission. 1965 Ford Zodiac will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 1983 Bristol Beaufighter will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 1983 Bristol Beaufighter | 1965 Ford Zodiac | |
| Make | Bristol | Ford |
| Model | Beaufighter | Zodiac |
| Year Released | 1983 | 1965 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5896 cc | 2553 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 108 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1750 kg | 1270 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4910 mm | 4650 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1770 mm | 1770 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1450 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2910 mm | 2780 mm |
