2000 AC Aceca vs. 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass
To start off, 2000 AC Aceca is newer by 24 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass 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 186 more horse power than 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass. (160 HP @ 3600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 AC Aceca should accelerate faster than 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass.
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, 2000 AC Aceca (400 Nm) has 149 more torque (in Nm) than 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass. (251 Nm). This means 2000 AC Aceca will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 AC Aceca | 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass | |
| Make | AC | Oldsmobile |
| Model | Aceca | Cutlass |
| Year Released | 2000 | 1976 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3504 cc | 3344 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 346 HP | 160 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 3600 RPM |
| Torque | 400 Nm | 251 Nm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 8.0:1 | 9.0:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 4 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 4640 mm | 4840 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1770 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1380 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2300 mm | 2670 mm |
