1966 DAF Daffodil vs. 2000 Holden Commodore
To start off, 2000 Holden Commodore is newer by 34 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 DAF Daffodil. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 DAF Daffodil would be higher. At 3,791 cc (6 cylinders), 2000 Holden Commodore is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Holden Commodore (197 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 171 more horse power than 1966 DAF Daffodil. (26 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2000 Holden Commodore should accelerate faster than 1966 DAF Daffodil. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Holden Commodore weights approximately 944 kg more than 1966 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:
1966 DAF Daffodil | 2000 Holden Commodore | |
Make | DAF | Holden |
Model | Daffodil | Commodore |
Year Released | 1966 | 2000 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 746 cc | 3791 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 2 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 26 HP | 197 HP |
Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 5200 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Vehicle Weight | 666 kg | 1610 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3620 mm | 5050 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1450 mm | 1850 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1380 mm | 1560 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2060 mm | 2950 mm |