1986 Caterham 1700 vs. 2012 Nissan Juke
To start off, 2012 Nissan Juke is newer by 26 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, 2012 Nissan Juke (188 HP @ 5600 RPM) has 20 more horse power than 1986 Caterham 1700. (168 HP @ 6500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Nissan Juke should accelerate faster than 1986 Caterham 1700.
Because 1986 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 1986 Caterham 1700. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 Nissan Juke, 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:
| 1986 Caterham 1700 | 2012 Nissan Juke | |
| Make | Caterham | Nissan |
| Model | 1700 | Juke |
| Year Released | 1986 | 2012 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1692 cc | 1600 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 168 HP | 188 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 5600 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | CVT |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 3390 mm | 4125 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1590 mm | 1765 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1050 mm | 1570 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2260 mm | 2530 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 36 L | 50 L |
