1965 Bristol 409 vs. 2010 Holden UTE
To start off, 2010 Holden UTE is newer by 45 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 Bristol 409. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 Bristol 409 would be higher. At 5,211 cc (8 cylinders), 1965 Bristol 409 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Holden UTE (281 HP) has 66 more horse power than 1965 Bristol 409. (215 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Holden UTE should accelerate faster than 1965 Bristol 409.
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, 1965 Bristol 409 (463 Nm) has 113 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Holden UTE. (350 Nm). This means 1965 Bristol 409 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Holden UTE. 1965 Bristol 409 has automatic transmission and 2010 Holden UTE has manual transmission. 2010 Holden UTE will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 1965 Bristol 409 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
1965 Bristol 409 | 2010 Holden UTE | |
Make | Bristol | Holden |
Model | 409 | UTE |
Year Released | 1965 | 2010 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5211 cc | 3600 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 215 HP | 281 HP |
Torque | 463 Nm | 350 Nm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |