2000 Ford Puma vs. 1962 Nissan Cedric
To start off, 2000 Ford Puma is newer by 38 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1962 Nissan Cedric. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1962 Nissan Cedric would be higher. At 1,679 cc (4 cylinders), 2000 Ford Puma is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Ford Puma (153 HP @ 7000 RPM) has 93 more horse power than 1962 Nissan Cedric. (60 HP @ 5000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 Ford Puma should accelerate faster than 1962 Nissan Cedric. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Ford Puma weights approximately 345 kg more than 1962 Nissan Cedric. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2000 Ford Puma (170 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 55 more torque (in Nm) than 1962 Nissan Cedric. (115 Nm @ 3200 RPM). This means 2000 Ford Puma will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1962 Nissan Cedric.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Ford Puma | 1962 Nissan Cedric | |
| Make | Ford | Nissan |
| Model | Puma | Cedric |
| Year Released | 2000 | 1962 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1679 cc | 1488 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 153 HP | 60 HP |
| Engine RPM | 7000 RPM | 5000 RPM |
| Torque | 170 Nm | 115 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 3200 RPM |
| Vehicle Weight | 1275 kg | 930 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3990 mm | 4420 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1690 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1320 mm | 1530 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2450 mm | 2540 mm |
