2000 BMW 316 vs. 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass
To start off, 2000 BMW 316 is newer by 20 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass would be higher. At 4,343 cc (8 cylinders), 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass (120 HP @ 3600 RPM) has 7 more horse power than 2000 BMW 316. (113 HP @ 5500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass should accelerate faster than 2000 BMW 316. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass weights approximately 88 kg more than 2000 BMW 316. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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, 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass (305 Nm) has 130 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 BMW 316. (175 Nm). This means 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 BMW 316.
Compare all specifications:
2000 BMW 316 | 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass | |
Make | BMW | Oldsmobile |
Model | 316 | Cutlass |
Year Released | 2000 | 1980 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1796 cc | 4343 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 113 HP | 120 HP |
Engine RPM | 5500 RPM | 3600 RPM |
Torque | 175 Nm | 305 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1398 kg | 1486 kg |
Wheelbase Size | 2730 mm | 2750 mm |