2000 Ford Puma vs. 1960 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud
To start off, 2000 Ford Puma is newer by 40 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1960 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1960 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud would be higher. At 6,230 cc (8 cylinders), 1960 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1960 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud weights approximately 837 kg more than 2000 Ford Puma.
Because 1960 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud 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 1960 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud. 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 | 1960 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud | |
| Make | Ford | Rolls-Royce |
| Model | Puma | Silver Cloud |
| Year Released | 2000 | 1960 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1679 cc | 6230 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 153 HP | 0 HP |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1275 kg | 2112 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3990 mm | 5490 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1910 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1320 mm | 1630 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2450 mm | 3070 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 42 L | 81 L |
