1985 Caterham 1700 vs. 2003 Ford Ecosport
To start off, 2003 Ford Ecosport is newer by 18 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1985 Caterham 1700. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1985 Caterham 1700 would be higher. At 1,692 cc (4 cylinders), 1985 Caterham 1700 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1985 Caterham 1700 (135 HP) has 68 more horse power than 2003 Ford Ecosport. (67 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1985 Caterham 1700 should accelerate faster than 2003 Ford Ecosport.
Because 1985 Caterham 1700 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 1985 Caterham 1700. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Ford Ecosport, 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:
1985 Caterham 1700 | 2003 Ford Ecosport | |
Make | Caterham | Ford |
Model | 1700 | Ecosport |
Year Released | 1985 | 2003 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1692 cc | 1400 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 135 HP | 67 HP |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Length | 3400 mm | 4228 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1580 mm | 1980 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1090 mm | 1679 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2240 mm | 2490 mm |