1963 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III vs. 1965 DAF Daffodil
To start off, 1965 DAF Daffodil is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III would be higher. At 2,912 cc (6 cylinders), 1963 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1963 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III (146 HP @ 5250 RPM) has 120 more horse power than 1965 DAF Daffodil. (26 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1963 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III should accelerate faster than 1965 DAF Daffodil. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1963 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III weights approximately 520 kg more than 1965 DAF Daffodil. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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.
Compare all specifications:
| 1963 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III | 1965 DAF Daffodil | |
| Make | Austin-Healey | DAF |
| Model | 3000 Mk III | Daffodil |
| Year Released | 1963 | 1965 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2912 cc | 746 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 2 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 146 HP | 26 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5250 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1180 kg | 660 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4010 mm | 3620 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1540 mm | 1450 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1250 mm | 1380 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2340 mm | 2060 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 54 L | 33 L |
