2009 Nissan Armada vs. 1978 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow
To start off, 2009 Nissan Armada is newer by 31 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1978 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1978 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow would be higher. At 6,750 cc (8 cylinders), 1978 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1978 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow weights approximately 764 kg more than 2009 Nissan Armada.
Because 2009 Nissan Armada is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1978 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Nissan Armada will offer significantly more control. 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:
| 2009 Nissan Armada | 1978 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow | |
| Make | Nissan | Rolls-Royce |
| Model | Armada | Silver Shadow |
| Year Released | 2009 | 1978 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5551 cc | 6750 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 317 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 8 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1442 kg | 2206 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5280 mm | 5280 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2020 mm | 1830 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1990 mm | 1520 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3140 mm | 3050 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 16.8 L/100km | 15.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 106 L | 107 L |
