2000 Rover 75 vs. 1965 Seat 600
To start off, 2000 Rover 75 is newer by 35 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 Seat 600. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 Seat 600 would be higher. At 1,796 cc (4 cylinders), 2000 Rover 75 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Rover 75 weights approximately 815 kg more than 1965 Seat 600.
Because 1965 Seat 600 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 1965 Seat 600. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Rover 75, 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 Rover 75 (161 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 114 more torque (in Nm) than 1965 Seat 600. (47 Nm @ 2500 RPM). This means 2000 Rover 75 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1965 Seat 600.
Compare all specifications:
2000 Rover 75 | 1965 Seat 600 | |
Make | Rover | Seat |
Model | 75 | 600 |
Year Released | 2000 | 1965 |
Engine Position | Front | Rear |
Engine Size | 1796 cc | 767 cc |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 118 HP | 0 HP |
Torque | 161 Nm | 47 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 2500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Vehicle Weight | 1390 kg | 575 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4760 mm | 3300 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1390 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1360 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2750 mm | 2010 mm |