2000 AC Aceca vs. 1981 Zastava 102
To start off, 2000 AC Aceca is newer by 19 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1981 Zastava 102. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1981 Zastava 102 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 297 more horse power than 1981 Zastava 102. (49 HP @ 5500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 AC Aceca should accelerate faster than 1981 Zastava 102. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 AC Aceca weights approximately 840 kg more than 1981 Zastava 102. 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 305 more torque (in Nm) than 1981 Zastava 102. (95 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2000 AC Aceca will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1981 Zastava 102.
Compare all specifications:
2000 AC Aceca | 1981 Zastava 102 | |
Make | AC | Zastava |
Model | Aceca | 102 |
Year Released | 2000 | 1981 |
Engine Size | 3504 cc | 1299 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 346 HP | 49 HP |
Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 5500 RPM |
Torque | 400 Nm | 95 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 3000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Vehicle Weight | 1610 kg | 770 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4640 mm | 3500 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1550 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1340 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2300 mm | 2160 mm |