1959 AC Aceca vs. 2000 Holden HRT
To start off, 2000 Holden HRT is newer by 41 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1959 AC Aceca. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1959 AC Aceca would be higher. At 5,000 cc (8 cylinders), 2000 Holden HRT is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 1959 AC Aceca 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 1959 AC Aceca. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Holden HRT, 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, 2000 Holden HRT (815 Nm) has 648 more torque (in Nm) than 1959 AC Aceca. (167 Nm). This means 2000 Holden HRT will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1959 AC Aceca.
Compare all specifications:
| 1959 AC Aceca | 2000 Holden HRT | |
| Make | AC | Holden |
| Model | Aceca | HRT |
| Year Released | 1959 | 2000 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1971 cc | 5000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 123 HP | 0 HP |
| Torque | 167 Nm | 815 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
