1964 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III vs. 2012 Holden UTE
To start off, 2012 Holden UTE is newer by 48 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III would be higher. At 3,600 cc (6 cylinders), 2012 Holden UTE is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Holden UTE (281 HP) has 133 more horse power than 1964 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III. (148 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Holden UTE should accelerate faster than 1964 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III.
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, 2012 Holden UTE (350 Nm) has 125 more torque (in Nm) than 1964 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III. (225 Nm). This means 2012 Holden UTE will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1964 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III.
Compare all specifications:
1964 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III | 2012 Holden UTE | |
Make | Austin-Healey | Holden |
Model | 3000 Mk III | UTE |
Year Released | 1964 | 2012 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2912 cc | 3600 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 148 HP | 281 HP |
Torque | 225 Nm | 350 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 2 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |