2003 Ford C-MAX vs. 1965 Nissan Bluebird
To start off, 2003 Ford C-MAX is newer by 38 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 Nissan Bluebird. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 Nissan Bluebird would be higher. At 1,999 cc (4 cylinders), 2003 Ford C-MAX is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Ford C-MAX (144 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 91 more horse power than 1965 Nissan Bluebird. (53 HP @ 4800 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2003 Ford C-MAX should accelerate faster than 1965 Nissan Bluebird. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Ford C-MAX weights approximately 492 kg more than 1965 Nissan Bluebird. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 1965 Nissan Bluebird is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2003 Ford C-MAX. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1965 Nissan Bluebird will offer significantly more control. 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:
2003 Ford C-MAX | 1965 Nissan Bluebird | |
Make | Ford | Nissan |
Model | C-MAX | Bluebird |
Year Released | 2003 | 1965 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1999 cc | 1189 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 144 HP | 53 HP |
Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 4800 RPM |
Fuel Type | Diesel | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
Vehicle Weight | 1392 kg | 900 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4340 mm | 3920 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1830 mm | 1500 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1600 mm | 1480 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2650 mm | 2290 mm |