1986 Caterham 1700 vs. 2004 Lincoln LS
To start off, 2004 Lincoln LS is newer by 18 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 3,933 cc (8 cylinders), 2004 Lincoln LS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Lincoln LS (280 HP) has 112 more horse power than 1986 Caterham 1700. (168 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2004 Lincoln LS should accelerate faster than 1986 Caterham 1700.
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. 2004 Lincoln LS has automatic transmission and 1986 Caterham 1700 has manual transmission. 1986 Caterham 1700 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2004 Lincoln LS will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
1986 Caterham 1700 | 2004 Lincoln LS | |
Make | Caterham | Lincoln |
Model | 1700 | LS |
Year Released | 1986 | 2004 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1692 cc | 3933 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 168 HP | 280 HP |
Engine Compression Ratio | 11.0:1 | 10.8:1 |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Length | 3390 mm | 4940 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1590 mm | 1870 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1050 mm | 1460 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2260 mm | 2910 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 36 L | 68 L |