1983 Ford Tempo vs. 2012 Mitsubishi i-MiEV
To start off, 2012 Mitsubishi i-MiEV is newer by 29 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1983 Ford Tempo. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1983 Ford Tempo would be higher. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2012 Mitsubishi i-MiEV weights approximately 60 kg more than 1983 Ford Tempo.
Because 2012 Mitsubishi i-MiEV 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 2012 Mitsubishi i-MiEV. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1983 Ford Tempo, 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:
| 1983 Ford Tempo | 2012 Mitsubishi i-MiEV | |
| Make | Ford | Mitsubishi |
| Model | Tempo | i-MiEV |
| Year Released | 1983 | 2012 |
| Engine Position | Front | Rear |
| Horse Power | 51 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Diesel | Electric |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Single Speed |
| Vehicle Weight | 1110 kg | 1170 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4480 mm | 3678 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1690 mm | 1585 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1340 mm | 1615 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2540 mm | 2550 mm |
