2010 Ford Ecosport vs. 1978 Chrysler 1609
To start off, 2010 Ford Ecosport is newer by 32 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1978 Chrysler 1609. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1978 Chrysler 1609 would be higher. At 1,639 cc (4 cylinders), 1978 Chrysler 1609 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Ford Ecosport (109 HP) has 20 more horse power than 1978 Chrysler 1609. (89 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2010 Ford Ecosport should accelerate faster than 1978 Chrysler 1609.
Because 1978 Chrysler 1609 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 1978 Chrysler 1609. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Ford Ecosport, 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. 1978 Chrysler 1609 has automatic transmission and 2010 Ford Ecosport has manual transmission. 2010 Ford Ecosport will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 1978 Chrysler 1609 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2010 Ford Ecosport | 1978 Chrysler 1609 | |
| Make | Ford | Chrysler |
| Model | Ecosport | 1609 |
| Year Released | 2010 | 1978 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1600 cc | 1639 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 109 HP | 89 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 4228 mm | 4530 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1980 mm | 1740 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1679 mm | 1450 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2490 mm | 2670 mm |
