1986 Caterham 1700 vs. 1951 Triumph Mayflower
To start off, 1986 Caterham 1700 is newer by 35 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1951 Triumph Mayflower. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1951 Triumph Mayflower would be higher. At 1,692 cc (4 cylinders), 1986 Caterham 1700 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1986 Caterham 1700 (168 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 131 more horse power than 1951 Triumph Mayflower. (37 HP @ 4200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1986 Caterham 1700 should accelerate faster than 1951 Triumph Mayflower.
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.
Compare all specifications:
| 1986 Caterham 1700 | 1951 Triumph Mayflower | |
| Make | Caterham | Triumph |
| Model | 1700 | Mayflower |
| Year Released | 1986 | 1951 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1692 cc | 1247 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 168 HP | 37 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 4200 RPM |
| Top Speed | 188 km/hour | 106 km/hour |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 3390 mm | 3920 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1590 mm | 1580 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1050 mm | 1580 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2260 mm | 2110 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 36 L | 45 L |
