2005 MCC Crossblade vs. 1959 Rover P4
To start off, 2005 MCC Crossblade is newer by 46 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1959 Rover P4. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1959 Rover P4 would be higher. At 1,997 cc (4 cylinders), 1959 Rover P4 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 MCC Crossblade (70 HP) has 19 more horse power than 1959 Rover P4. (51 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2005 MCC Crossblade should accelerate faster than 1959 Rover P4. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1959 Rover P4 weights approximately 636 kg more than 2005 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, 1959 Rover P4 (138 Nm @ 2000 RPM) has 36 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 MCC Crossblade. (102 Nm @ 3210 RPM). This means 1959 Rover P4 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 MCC Crossblade.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 MCC Crossblade | 1959 Rover P4 | |
| Make | MCC | Rover |
| Model | Crossblade | P4 |
| Year Released | 2005 | 1959 |
| Engine Size | 599 cc | 1997 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 3 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 70 HP | 51 HP |
| Torque | 102 Nm | 138 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3210 RPM | 2000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 744 kg | 1380 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 2630 mm | 4550 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1630 mm | 1680 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1520 mm | 1620 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 1810 mm | 2830 mm |
