2000 Ford Puma vs. 1954 Talbot Baby
To start off, 2000 Ford Puma is newer by 46 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1954 Talbot Baby. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1954 Talbot Baby would be higher. At 2,693 cc (6 cylinders), 1954 Talbot Baby is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Ford Puma (153 HP @ 7000 RPM) has 45 more horse power than 1954 Talbot Baby. (108 HP @ 4500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 Ford Puma should accelerate faster than 1954 Talbot Baby. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1954 Talbot Baby weights approximately 375 kg more than 2000 Ford Puma.
Because 1954 Talbot Baby 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 Talbot Baby. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Ford Puma, 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 Puma | 1954 Talbot Baby | |
| Make | Ford | Talbot |
| Model | Puma | Baby |
| Year Released | 2000 | 1954 |
| Engine Size | 1679 cc | 2693 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 153 HP | 108 HP |
| Engine RPM | 7000 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 1275 kg | 1650 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3990 mm | 5060 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1320 mm | 1510 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2450 mm | 3130 mm |
