2002 MCC Crossblade vs. 1950 Simca 8
To start off, 2002 MCC Crossblade is newer by 52 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1950 Simca 8. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1950 Simca 8 would be higher. At 1,220 cc (4 cylinders), 1950 Simca 8 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1950 Simca 8 weights approximately 140 kg more than 2002 MCC Crossblade.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2002 MCC Crossblade | 1950 Simca 8 | |
| Make | MCC | Simca |
| Model | Crossblade | 8 |
| Year Released | 2002 | 1950 |
| Engine Size | 599 cc | 1220 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 3 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 70 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 740 kg | 880 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 2630 mm | 4030 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1630 mm | 1490 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1520 mm | 1540 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 1810 mm | 2430 mm |
