2000 Audi TT vs. 1986 Caterham 1700
To start off, 2000 Audi TT is newer by 14 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 1,781 cc (4 cylinders), 2000 Audi TT is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Audi TT (170 HP @ 5700 RPM) has 2 more horse power than 1986 Caterham 1700. (168 HP @ 6500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 Audi TT 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, 2000 Audi TT, 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:
2000 Audi TT | 1986 Caterham 1700 | |
Make | Audi | Caterham |
Model | TT | 1700 |
Year Released | 2000 | 1986 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1781 cc | 1692 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 170 HP | 168 HP |
Engine RPM | 5700 RPM | 6500 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 11.0:1 |
Top Speed | 209 km/hour | 188 km/hour |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 2 seats |
Vehicle Length | 4050 mm | 3390 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1770 mm | 1590 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1050 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2430 mm | 2260 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 55 L | 36 L |