1964 AC Cobra vs. 1999 Holden Maloo
To start off, 1999 Holden Maloo is newer by 35 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 AC Cobra. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 AC Cobra would be higher. At 5,699 cc (8 cylinders), 1999 Holden Maloo is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 1964 AC Cobra 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 1964 AC Cobra. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1999 Holden Maloo, 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, 1999 Holden Maloo (542 Nm) has 116 more torque (in Nm) than 1964 AC Cobra. (426 Nm). This means 1999 Holden Maloo will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1964 AC Cobra.
Compare all specifications:
1964 AC Cobra | 1999 Holden Maloo | |
Make | AC | Holden |
Model | Cobra | Maloo |
Year Released | 1964 | 1999 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4737 cc | 5699 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Horse Power | 267 HP | 0 HP |
Torque | 426 Nm | 542 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 3 seats |