1966 Holden HD vs. 2000 Oldsmobile SS
To start off, 2000 Oldsmobile SS is newer by 34 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Holden HD. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Holden HD would be higher. At 3,791 cc (6 cylinders), 2000 Oldsmobile SS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Oldsmobile SS (202 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 80 more horse power than 1966 Holden HD. (122 HP @ 4600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2000 Oldsmobile SS should accelerate faster than 1966 Holden HD.
Because 1966 Holden HD 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 Holden HD. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Oldsmobile SS, 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, 2000 Oldsmobile SS (318 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 81 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 Holden HD. (237 Nm @ 2200 RPM). This means 2000 Oldsmobile SS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1966 Holden HD.
Compare all specifications:
| 1966 Holden HD | 2000 Oldsmobile SS | |
| Make | Holden | Oldsmobile |
| Model | HD | SS |
| Year Released | 1966 | 2000 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2930 cc | 3791 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 122 HP | 202 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 5200 RPM |
| Torque | 237 Nm | 318 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2200 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Vehicle Length | 4580 mm | 5130 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 1900 mm |
