2003 Caterham 7 vs. 1980 Holden Kingswood
To start off, 2003 Caterham 7 is newer by 23 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1980 Holden Kingswood. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1980 Holden Kingswood would be higher. At 3,298 cc (6 cylinders), 1980 Holden Kingswood is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Caterham 7 (200 HP @ 7500 RPM) has 111 more horse power than 1980 Holden Kingswood. (89 HP @ 3600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2003 Caterham 7 should accelerate faster than 1980 Holden Kingswood. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1980 Holden Kingswood weights approximately 880 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, 1980 Holden Kingswood (221 Nm @ 2100 RPM) has 11 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Caterham 7. (210 Nm @ 5750 RPM). This means 1980 Holden Kingswood will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Caterham 7.
Compare all specifications:
| 2003 Caterham 7 | 1980 Holden Kingswood | |
| Make | Caterham | Holden |
| Model | 7 | Kingswood |
| Year Released | 2003 | 1980 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1796 cc | 3298 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 200 HP | 89 HP |
| Engine RPM | 7500 RPM | 3600 RPM |
| Torque | 210 Nm | 221 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 5750 RPM | 2100 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 490 kg | 1370 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3110 mm | 4850 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1580 mm | 1900 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 810 mm | 1410 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2230 mm | 2830 mm |
