2003 Ford C-MAX vs. 1968 MG MGC
To start off, 2003 Ford C-MAX is newer by 35 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1968 MG MGC. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1968 MG MGC would be higher. At 2,911 cc (6 cylinders), 1968 MG MGC is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1968 MG MGC (148 HP @ 5250 RPM) has 38 more horse power than 2003 Ford C-MAX. (110 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1968 MG MGC should accelerate faster than 2003 Ford C-MAX.
Because 1968 MG MGC is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 1968 MG MGC. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Ford C-MAX, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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 Ford C-MAX (245 Nm @ 1750 RPM) has 71 more torque (in Nm) than 1968 MG MGC. (174 Nm @ 3500 RPM). This means 2003 Ford C-MAX will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1968 MG MGC.
Compare all specifications:
2003 Ford C-MAX | 1968 MG MGC | |
Make | Ford | MG |
Model | C-MAX | MGC |
Year Released | 2003 | 1968 |
Body Type | Minivan | Convertible |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1560 cc | 2911 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 110 HP | 148 HP |
Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 5250 RPM |
Torque | 245 Nm | 174 Nm |
Torque RPM | 1750 RPM | 3500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Diesel | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4340 mm | 4530 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1600 mm | 1530 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2650 mm | 2560 mm |