2004 Bristol Fighter vs. 1962 Ford Thunderbird
To start off, 2004 Bristol Fighter is newer by 42 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1962 Ford Thunderbird. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1962 Ford Thunderbird would be higher. At 7,994 cc (10 cylinders), 2004 Bristol Fighter is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Bristol Fighter (660 HP @ 5900 RPM) has 315 more horse power than 1962 Ford Thunderbird. (345 HP @ 5600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Bristol Fighter should accelerate faster than 1962 Ford Thunderbird. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1962 Ford Thunderbird weights approximately 335 kg more than 2004 Bristol Fighter.
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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Bristol Fighter | 1962 Ford Thunderbird | |
| Make | Bristol | Ford |
| Model | Fighter | Thunderbird |
| Year Released | 2004 | 1962 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 7994 cc | 6964 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 10 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 660 HP | 345 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5900 RPM | 5600 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1540 kg | 1875 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4430 mm | 5210 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1930 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1340 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2760 mm | 2880 mm |
