2008 BMW X5 vs. 1976 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow
To start off, 2008 BMW X5 is newer by 32 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1976 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1976 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow would be higher. At 6,750 cc (8 cylinders), 1976 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2008 BMW X5 weights approximately 37 kg more than 1976 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow.
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:
2008 BMW X5 | 1976 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow | |
Make | BMW | Rolls-Royce |
Model | X5 | Silver Shadow |
Year Released | 2008 | 1976 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4398 cc | 6750 cc |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 0 HP |
Engine Bore Size | 92 mm | 104.1 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 82.7 mm | 99.1 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 8.0:1 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Top Speed | 240 km/hour | 190 km/hour |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 2191 kg | 2154 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 5180 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1520 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2830 mm | 3060 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 15.4 L/100km | 15.2 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 85 L | 107 L |