2003 Caterham 7 vs. 1976 Zastava 132
To start off, 2003 Caterham 7 is newer by 27 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1976 Zastava 132. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1976 Zastava 132 would be higher. At 1,794 cc (4 cylinders), 2003 Caterham 7 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Caterham 7 (160 HP @ 7500 RPM) has 54 more horse power than 1976 Zastava 132. (106 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2003 Caterham 7 should accelerate faster than 1976 Zastava 132. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1976 Zastava 132 weights approximately 595 kg more than 2003 Caterham 7.
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. Let's talk about torque, 2003 Caterham 7 (176 Nm @ 5750 RPM) has 34 more torque (in Nm) than 1976 Zastava 132. (142 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2003 Caterham 7 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1976 Zastava 132.
Compare all specifications:
| 2003 Caterham 7 | 1976 Zastava 132 | |
| Make | Caterham | Zastava |
| Model | 7 | 132 |
| Year Released | 2003 | 1976 |
| Engine Size | 1794 cc | 1756 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 160 HP | 106 HP |
| Engine RPM | 7500 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 176 Nm | 142 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 5750 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 500 kg | 1095 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3110 mm | 4410 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1580 mm | 1650 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 810 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2230 mm | 2560 mm |
