2006 Buick Lucerne vs. 1973 Datsun 240Z
To start off, 2006 Buick Lucerne is newer by 33 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1973 Datsun 240Z. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1973 Datsun 240Z would be higher. At 4,572 cc (8 cylinders), 2006 Buick Lucerne is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Buick Lucerne (275 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 124 more horse power than 1973 Datsun 240Z. (151 HP @ 5600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Buick Lucerne should accelerate faster than 1973 Datsun 240Z.
Because 1973 Datsun 240Z 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 1973 Datsun 240Z. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Buick Lucerne, 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, 2006 Buick Lucerne (400 Nm @ 4400 RPM) has 202 more torque (in Nm) than 1973 Datsun 240Z. (198 Nm @ 4400 RPM). This means 2006 Buick Lucerne will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1973 Datsun 240Z.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Buick Lucerne | 1973 Datsun 240Z | |
Make | Buick | Datsun |
Model | Lucerne | 240Z |
Year Released | 2006 | 1973 |
Body Type | Sedan | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4572 cc | 2393 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 275 HP | 151 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5600 RPM |
Torque | 400 Nm | 198 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4400 RPM | 4400 RPM |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 3 doors |
Vehicle Length | 5170 mm | 4140 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1880 mm | 1630 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2940 mm | 2300 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.8 L/100km | 11 L/100km |