1983 Jeep CJ vs. 1968 Lotus Elan
To start off, 1983 Jeep CJ is newer by 15 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1968 Lotus Elan. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1968 Lotus Elan would be higher. At 1,995 cc (4 cylinders), 1983 Jeep CJ is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1968 Lotus Elan (116 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 31 more horse power than 1983 Jeep CJ. (85 HP @ 5000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1968 Lotus Elan should accelerate faster than 1983 Jeep CJ. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1983 Jeep CJ weights approximately 440 kg more than 1968 Lotus Elan.
Because 1983 Jeep CJ is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1968 Lotus Elan. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1983 Jeep CJ will offer significantly more control. 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, 1983 Jeep CJ (150 Nm @ 2750 RPM) has 4 more torque (in Nm) than 1968 Lotus Elan. (146 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 1983 Jeep CJ will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1968 Lotus Elan.
Compare all specifications:
1983 Jeep CJ | 1968 Lotus Elan | |
Make | Jeep | Lotus |
Model | CJ | Elan |
Year Released | 1983 | 1968 |
Body Type | SUV | Convertible |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1995 cc | 1558 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 85 HP | 116 HP |
Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 6250 RPM |
Torque | 150 Nm | 146 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2750 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Vehicle Weight | 1290 kg | 850 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3900 mm | 4290 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1670 mm | 1680 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1840 mm | 1200 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2380 mm | 2440 mm |