2000 Ford Taurus vs. 1984 Lotus Etna
To start off, 2000 Ford Taurus is newer by 16 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1984 Lotus Etna. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1984 Lotus Etna would be higher. At 3,946 cc (8 cylinders), 1984 Lotus Etna is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1984 Lotus Etna (331 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 175 more horse power than 2000 Ford Taurus. (156 HP @ 4900 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1984 Lotus Etna should accelerate faster than 2000 Ford Taurus.
Because 1984 Lotus Etna 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 1984 Lotus Etna. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Ford Taurus, 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, 1984 Lotus Etna (408 Nm @ 5500 RPM) has 164 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Ford Taurus. (244 Nm @ 3950 RPM). This means 1984 Lotus Etna will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Ford Taurus. 2000 Ford Taurus has automatic transmission and 1984 Lotus Etna has manual transmission. 1984 Lotus Etna will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2000 Ford Taurus will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Ford Taurus | 1984 Lotus Etna | |
| Make | Ford | Lotus |
| Model | Taurus | Etna |
| Year Released | 2000 | 1984 |
| Engine Position | Front | Middle |
| Engine Size | 2933 cc | 3946 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 156 HP | 331 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4900 RPM | 6500 RPM |
| Torque | 244 Nm | 408 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3950 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 88.9 mm | 95.2 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 78.7 mm | 69.3 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.3:1 | 11.2:1 |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5030 mm | 4270 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1850 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1150 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2760 mm | 2520 mm |
