2000 AC Aceca vs. 1968 Nissan Cedric
To start off, 2000 AC Aceca is newer by 32 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1968 Nissan Cedric. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1968 Nissan Cedric would be higher. At 3,504 cc (8 cylinders), 2000 AC Aceca is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 AC Aceca (346 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 232 more horse power than 1968 Nissan Cedric. (114 HP @ 5200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 AC Aceca should accelerate faster than 1968 Nissan Cedric. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 AC Aceca weights approximately 320 kg more than 1968 Nissan Cedric. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2000 AC Aceca (400 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 235 more torque (in Nm) than 1968 Nissan Cedric. (165 Nm @ 4400 RPM). This means 2000 AC Aceca will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1968 Nissan Cedric.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 AC Aceca | 1968 Nissan Cedric | |
| Make | AC | Nissan |
| Model | Aceca | Cedric |
| Year Released | 2000 | 1968 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3504 cc | 1998 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 346 HP | 114 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 5200 RPM |
| Torque | 400 Nm | 165 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 4400 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Vehicle Weight | 1610 kg | 1290 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4640 mm | 4700 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1700 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1470 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2300 mm | 2700 mm |
