2000 Lada Samara vs. 1964 Nissan Cedric
To start off, 2000 Lada Samara is newer by 36 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Nissan Cedric. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Nissan Cedric would be higher. At 1,499 cc (4 cylinders), 2000 Lada Samara is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Lada Samara (76 HP @ 5400 RPM) has 16 more horse power than 1964 Nissan Cedric. (60 HP @ 5000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 Lada Samara should accelerate faster than 1964 Nissan Cedric. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1964 Nissan Cedric weights approximately 95 kg more than 2000 Lada Samara.
Because 1964 Nissan Cedric is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2000 Lada Samara. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1964 Nissan Cedric will offer significantly more control. 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 Lada Samara (116 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 1 more torque (in Nm) than 1964 Nissan Cedric. (115 Nm @ 3200 RPM). This means 2000 Lada Samara will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1964 Nissan Cedric.
Compare all specifications:
2000 Lada Samara | 1964 Nissan Cedric | |
Make | Lada | Nissan |
Model | Samara | Cedric |
Year Released | 2000 | 1964 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1499 cc | 1488 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 76 HP | 60 HP |
Engine RPM | 5400 RPM | 5000 RPM |
Torque | 116 Nm | 115 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 3200 RPM |
Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
Vehicle Weight | 990 kg | 1085 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4340 mm | 4420 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1660 mm | 1690 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 1530 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2470 mm | 2540 mm |