1986 Caterham 1700 vs. 2002 Smart ForTwo
To start off, 2002 Smart ForTwo is newer by 16 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1986 Caterham 1700. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1986 Caterham 1700 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 108 more horse power than 2002 Smart ForTwo. (60 HP @ 5250 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1986 Caterham 1700 should accelerate faster than 2002 Smart ForTwo.
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 | 2002 Smart ForTwo | |
| Make | Caterham | Smart |
| Model | 1700 | ForTwo |
| Year Released | 1986 | 2002 |
| Engine Position | Front | Rear |
| Engine Size | 1692 cc | 696 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 168 HP | 60 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 5250 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 11.0:1 | 9.0:1 |
| Top Speed | 188 km/hour | 135 km/hour |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 2 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 3390 mm | 2510 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1590 mm | 1520 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1050 mm | 1560 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2260 mm | 1820 mm |
