2000 Chrysler ESX 3 vs. 1981 Seat Ritmo

To start off, 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 is newer by 19 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1981 Seat Ritmo. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1981 Seat Ritmo 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 11 more horse power than 1981 Seat Ritmo. (63 HP @ 5800 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 should accelerate faster than 1981 Seat Ritmo. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 weights approximately 738 kg more than 1981 Seat Ritmo. 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 240 more torque (in Nm) than 1981 Seat Ritmo. (92 Nm). This means 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1981 Seat Ritmo. 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 has automatic transmission and 1981 Seat Ritmo has manual transmission. 1981 Seat Ritmo 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: