1996 Caterham 7 vs. 2000 MCC ForTwo
To start off, 2000 MCC ForTwo is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Caterham 7. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Caterham 7 would be higher. At 1,588 cc (4 cylinders), 1996 Caterham 7 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1996 Caterham 7 (138 HP @ 7000 RPM) has 98 more horse power than 2000 MCC ForTwo. (40 HP @ 4200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1996 Caterham 7 should accelerate faster than 2000 MCC ForTwo. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 MCC ForTwo weights approximately 252 kg more than 1996 Caterham 7.
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. Let's talk about torque, 1996 Caterham 7 (156 Nm @ 5000 RPM) has 56 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 MCC ForTwo. (100 Nm @ 1800 RPM). This means 1996 Caterham 7 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 MCC ForTwo.
Compare all specifications:
| 1996 Caterham 7 | 2000 MCC ForTwo | |
| Make | Caterham | MCC |
| Model | 7 | ForTwo |
| Year Released | 1996 | 2000 |
| Engine Position | Front | Rear |
| Engine Size | 1588 cc | 799 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 138 HP | 40 HP |
| Engine RPM | 7000 RPM | 4200 RPM |
| Torque | 156 Nm | 100 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 5000 RPM | 1800 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 478 kg | 730 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3110 mm | 2510 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1580 mm | 1550 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 810 mm | 1540 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2240 mm | 1810 mm |
