2003 MCC Crossblade vs. 1972 Seat 1430
To start off, 2003 MCC Crossblade is newer by 31 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1972 Seat 1430. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1972 Seat 1430 would be higher. At 1,438 cc (4 cylinders), 1972 Seat 1430 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, both vehicles can yield 70 horse power. So under normal driving conditions, the acceleration of both vehicles should be relatively similar. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1972 Seat 1430 weights approximately 190 kg more than 2003 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. Let's talk about torque, 1972 Seat 1430 (112 Nm @ 3300 RPM) has 10 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 MCC Crossblade. (102 Nm @ 3210 RPM). This means 1972 Seat 1430 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 MCC Crossblade.
Compare all specifications:
| 2003 MCC Crossblade | 1972 Seat 1430 | |
| Make | MCC | Seat |
| Model | Crossblade | 1430 |
| Year Released | 2003 | 1972 |
| Engine Size | 598 cc | 1438 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 3 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 70 HP | 70 HP |
| Torque | 102 Nm | 112 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3210 RPM | 3300 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 740 kg | 930 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 2630 mm | 4030 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1630 mm | 1630 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1520 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 1810 mm | 2430 mm |
