2005 MCC Crossblade vs. 1966 Suzuki Fronte
To start off, 2005 MCC Crossblade is newer by 39 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Suzuki Fronte. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Suzuki Fronte would be higher. At 785 cc, 1966 Suzuki Fronte is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 MCC Crossblade (70 HP) has 35 more horse power than 1966 Suzuki Fronte. (35 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2005 MCC Crossblade should accelerate faster than 1966 Suzuki Fronte. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1966 Suzuki Fronte weights approximately 16 kg more than 2005 MCC Crossblade.
Because 2005 MCC Crossblade 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 2005 MCC Crossblade. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1966 Suzuki Fronte, 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. Let's talk about torque, 2005 MCC Crossblade (102 Nm @ 3210 RPM) has 21 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 Suzuki Fronte. (81 Nm @ 3500 RPM). This means 2005 MCC Crossblade will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1966 Suzuki Fronte.
Compare all specifications:
2005 MCC Crossblade | 1966 Suzuki Fronte | |
Make | MCC | Suzuki |
Model | Crossblade | Fronte |
Year Released | 2005 | 1966 |
Engine Size | 599 cc | 785 cc |
Horse Power | 70 HP | 35 HP |
Torque | 102 Nm | 81 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3210 RPM | 3500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Vehicle Weight | 744 kg | 760 kg |
Vehicle Length | 2630 mm | 3880 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1630 mm | 1490 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1520 mm | 1370 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 1810 mm | 2250 mm |