1967 Bizzarrini A3C vs. 1996 Holden XU 6
To start off, 1996 Holden XU 6 is newer by 29 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1967 Bizzarrini A3C. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1967 Bizzarrini A3C would be higher.
Because 1967 Bizzarrini A3C 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 1967 Bizzarrini A3C. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1996 Holden XU 6, 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, 1996 Holden XU 6 (515 Nm) has 5 more torque (in Nm) than 1967 Bizzarrini A3C. (510 Nm). This means 1996 Holden XU 6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1967 Bizzarrini A3C. 1996 Holden XU 6 has automatic transmission and 1967 Bizzarrini A3C has manual transmission. 1967 Bizzarrini A3C will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 1996 Holden XU 6 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 1967 Bizzarrini A3C | 1996 Holden XU 6 | |
| Make | Bizzarrini | Holden |
| Model | A3C | XU 6 |
| Year Released | 1967 | 1996 |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 361 HP | 0 HP |
| Torque | 510 Nm | 515 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
