1986 Caterham 1700 vs. 2010 Nissan Armada
To start off, 2010 Nissan Armada is newer by 24 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 5,600 cc (8 cylinders), 2010 Nissan Armada is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Nissan Armada (317 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 149 more horse power than 1986 Caterham 1700. (168 HP @ 6500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Nissan Armada 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. 2010 Nissan Armada 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. 2010 Nissan Armada will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
1986 Caterham 1700 | 2010 Nissan Armada | |
Make | Caterham | Nissan |
Model | 1700 | Armada |
Year Released | 1986 | 2010 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1692 cc | 5600 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 168 HP | 317 HP |
Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 5200 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 7 seats |
Vehicle Length | 3390 mm | 5276 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1590 mm | 2014 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1050 mm | 1961 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2260 mm | 3129 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 36 L | 106 L |