1966 BMW 2000 vs. 2012 Holden Epica
To start off, 2012 Holden Epica is newer by 46 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 BMW 2000. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 BMW 2000 would be higher. Both 1966 BMW 2000 and 2012 Holden Epica are equipped with a 1,991 cc engine.
Because 1966 BMW 2000 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 1966 BMW 2000. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 Holden Epica, 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 1966 BMW 2000 | 2012 Holden Epica | |
| Make | BMW | Holden |
| Model | 2000 | Epica |
| Year Released | 1966 | 2012 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1991 cc | 1991 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 148 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4530 mm | 4805 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1690 mm | 1810 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1410 mm | 1450 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2560 mm | 2700 mm |
