1960 AC Aceca vs. 1973 Holden UTE
To start off, 1973 Holden UTE is newer by 13 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1960 AC Aceca. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1960 AC Aceca would be higher. At 5,047 cc (8 cylinders), 1973 Holden UTE is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1973 Holden UTE (240 HP @ 4800 RPM) has 117 more horse power than 1960 AC Aceca. (123 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1973 Holden UTE should accelerate faster than 1960 AC Aceca.
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. Let's talk about torque, 1973 Holden UTE (427 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 260 more torque (in Nm) than 1960 AC Aceca. (167 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 1973 Holden UTE will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1960 AC Aceca.
Compare all specifications:
1960 AC Aceca | 1973 Holden UTE | |
Make | AC | Holden |
Model | Aceca | UTE |
Year Released | 1960 | 1973 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1969 cc | 5047 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 123 HP | 240 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 4800 RPM |
Torque | 167 Nm | 427 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 3000 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 66 mm | 101.6 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 96 mm | 77.8 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 9.0:1 | 9.0:1 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 3 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4070 mm | 4890 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1560 mm | 1880 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1330 mm | 1390 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 59 L | 75 L |