2000 Chrysler ESX 3 vs. 1979 Mitsubishi Celeste

To start off, 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 is newer by 21 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1979 Mitsubishi Celeste. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1979 Mitsubishi Celeste would be higher. At 1,499 cc (4 cylinders), 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, both vehicles can yield 74 horse power. So under normal driving conditions, the acceleration of both vehicles should be relatively similar. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 weights approximately 710 kg more than 1979 Mitsubishi Celeste.

Because 1979 Mitsubishi Celeste 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 1979 Mitsubishi Celeste. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Chrysler ESX 3, 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. Let's talk about torque, 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 (332 Nm) has 214 more torque (in Nm) than 1979 Mitsubishi Celeste. (118 Nm). This means 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1979 Mitsubishi Celeste. 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 has automatic transmission and 1979 Mitsubishi Celeste has manual transmission. 1979 Mitsubishi Celeste will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.

Compare all specifications: