2004 Honda Fit vs. 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass
To start off, 2004 Honda Fit is newer by 22 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass would be higher. At 3,790 cc (6 cylinders), 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass weights approximately 420 kg more than 2004 Honda Fit.
Because 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass 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 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Honda Fit, 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:
| 2004 Honda Fit | 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass | |
| Make | Honda | Oldsmobile |
| Model | Fit | Cutlass |
| Year Released | 2004 | 1982 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1335 cc | 3790 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 82 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 1060 kg | 1480 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4320 mm | 5530 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1700 mm | 1830 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1490 mm | 1390 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2460 mm | 2760 mm |
