2002 Land Rover Range Rover vs. 1963 Nissan Cedric
To start off, 2002 Land Rover Range Rover is newer by 39 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Nissan Cedric. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Nissan Cedric would be higher. At 4,398 cc (8 cylinders), 2002 Land Rover Range Rover is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 Land Rover Range Rover (282 HP) has 222 more horse power than 1963 Nissan Cedric. (60 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2002 Land Rover Range Rover should accelerate faster than 1963 Nissan Cedric. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2002 Land Rover Range Rover weights approximately 1355 kg more than 1963 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, 2002 Land Rover Range Rover (439 Nm) has 324 more torque (in Nm) than 1963 Nissan Cedric. (115 Nm). This means 2002 Land Rover Range Rover will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1963 Nissan Cedric.
Compare all specifications:
| 2002 Land Rover Range Rover | 1963 Nissan Cedric | |
| Make | Land Rover | Nissan |
| Model | Range Rover | Cedric |
| Year Released | 2002 | 1963 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4398 cc | 1488 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 282 HP | 60 HP |
| Torque | 439 Nm | 115 Nm |
| Vehicle Weight | 2440 kg | 1085 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4450 mm | 4420 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1820 mm | 1690 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1800 mm | 1530 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2550 mm | 2540 mm |
