2000 Chrysler ESX 3 vs. 1964 MG 1100
To start off, 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 is newer by 36 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 MG 1100. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 MG 1100 would be higher. At 1,499 cc (4 cylinders), 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 (74 HP @ 6400 RPM) has 21 more horse power than 1964 MG 1100. (53 HP @ 5500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 should accelerate faster than 1964 MG 1100. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 weights approximately 795 kg more than 1964 MG 1100. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear 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 Chrysler ESX 3 (332 Nm) has 249 more torque (in Nm) than 1964 MG 1100. (83 Nm). This means 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1964 MG 1100.
Compare all specifications:
2000 Chrysler ESX 3 | 1964 MG 1100 | |
Make | Chrysler | MG |
Model | ESX 3 | 1100 |
Year Released | 2000 | 1964 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1499 cc | 1098 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 74 HP | 53 HP |
Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 5500 RPM |
Torque | 332 Nm | 83 Nm |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Vehicle Weight | 1620 kg | 825 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4910 mm | 3730 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1540 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1350 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3000 mm | 2380 mm |