2000 Ford Taurus vs. 2009 Tata Nano
To start off, 2009 Tata Nano is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Ford Taurus. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Ford Taurus would be higher. At 2,967 cc (6 cylinders), 2000 Ford Taurus is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Ford Taurus (154 HP @ 4900 RPM) has 119 more horse power than 2009 Tata Nano. (35 HP @ 5250 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 Ford Taurus should accelerate faster than 2009 Tata Nano. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Ford Taurus weights approximately 877 kg more than 2009 Tata Nano. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2009 Tata Nano 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 2009 Tata Nano. 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, 2000 Ford Taurus (244 Nm @ 3950 RPM) has 196 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Tata Nano. (48 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2000 Ford Taurus will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Tata Nano. 2000 Ford Taurus has automatic transmission and 2009 Tata Nano has manual transmission. 2009 Tata Nano 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 | 2009 Tata Nano | |
Make | Ford | Tata |
Model | Taurus | Nano |
Year Released | 2000 | 2009 |
Body Type | Sedan | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Rear |
Engine Size | 2967 cc | 624 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 2 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 154 HP | 35 HP |
Engine RPM | 4900 RPM | 5250 RPM |
Torque | 244 Nm | 48 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3950 RPM | 3000 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 88.9 mm | 73.5 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 78.7 mm | 73.5 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 9.3:1 | 9.5:1 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1477 kg | 600 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5030 mm | 3099 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1495 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1652 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3030 mm | 2230 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.8 L/100km | 4.2 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 37 L |