1962 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk II vs. 1966 Suzuki Fronte

To start off, 1966 Suzuki Fronte is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1962 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk II. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1962 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk II would be higher. At 2,912 cc (6 cylinders), 1962 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk II is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1962 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk II (129 HP @ 4600 RPM) has 111 more horse power than 1966 Suzuki Fronte. (18 HP @ 5500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1962 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk II should accelerate faster than 1966 Suzuki Fronte. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1962 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk II weights approximately 654 kg more than 1966 Suzuki Fronte. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.

Because 1962 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk II 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 1962 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk II. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1966 Suzuki Fronte, 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, 1962 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk II (167 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 135 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 Suzuki Fronte. (32 Nm @ 3700 RPM). This means 1962 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk II will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1966 Suzuki Fronte.

Compare all specifications: