2003 MCC Smart vs. 1959 Triumph TR3
To start off, 2003 MCC Smart is newer by 44 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1959 Triumph TR3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1959 Triumph TR3 would be higher. At 1,991 cc (4 cylinders), 1959 Triumph TR3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1959 Triumph TR3 (94 HP) has 21 more horse power than 2003 MCC Smart. (73 HP) In normal driving conditions, 1959 Triumph TR3 should accelerate faster than 2003 MCC Smart. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 MCC Smart weights approximately 40 kg more than 1959 Triumph TR3.
Because 1959 Triumph TR3 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 1959 Triumph TR3. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 MCC Smart, 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2003 MCC Smart | 1959 Triumph TR3 | |
| Make | MCC | Triumph |
| Model | Smart | TR3 |
| Year Released | 2003 | 1959 |
| Body Type | Hatchback | Roadster |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1124 cc | 1991 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 3 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 73 HP | 94 HP |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 965 kg | 925 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3760 mm | 3840 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1690 mm | 1400 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1280 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2510 mm | 2240 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 47 L | 29 L |
