2000 Ford e-Ka vs. 1954 Rover P4
To start off, 2000 Ford e-Ka is newer by 46 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1954 Rover P4. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1954 Rover P4 would be higher. At 2,103 cc (6 cylinders), 1954 Rover P4 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Ford e-Ka (89 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 15 more horse power than 1954 Rover P4. (74 HP @ 4200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 Ford e-Ka should accelerate faster than 1954 Rover P4. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1954 Rover P4 weights approximately 182 kg more than 2000 Ford e-Ka.
Because 1954 Rover P4 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 1954 Rover P4. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Ford e-Ka, 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 Ford e-Ka (190 Nm) has 40 more torque (in Nm) than 1954 Rover P4. (150 Nm). This means 2000 Ford e-Ka will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1954 Rover P4.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Ford e-Ka | 1954 Rover P4 | |
| Make | Ford | Rover |
| Model | e-Ka | P4 |
| Year Released | 2000 | 1954 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1758 cc | 2103 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 3 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 89 HP | 74 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 4200 RPM |
| Torque | 190 Nm | 150 Nm |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1208 kg | 1390 kg |
| Wheelbase Size | 2730 mm | 2830 mm |
