2000 Ford Artic vs. 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass
To start off, 2000 Ford Artic is newer by 19 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass would be higher. At 3,998 cc (6 cylinders), 2000 Ford Artic is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass weights approximately 22 kg more than 2000 Ford Artic.
Because 2000 Ford Artic 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 2000 Ford Artic. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass, 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 Ford Artic | 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass | |
Make | Ford | Oldsmobile |
Model | Artic | Cutlass |
Year Released | 2000 | 1981 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3998 cc | 2260 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 128 HP | 0 HP |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1298 kg | 1320 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5240 mm | 4850 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1830 mm | 1780 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3200 mm | 2680 mm |