1968 AMC AMX vs. 2004 Holden UTE
To start off, 2004 Holden UTE is newer by 36 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1968 AMC AMX. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1968 AMC AMX would be higher. At 6,386 cc (8 cylinders), 1968 AMC AMX is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1968 AMC AMX (315 HP @ 4600 RPM) has 111 more horse power than 2004 Holden UTE. (204 HP @ 5200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1968 AMC AMX should accelerate faster than 2004 Holden UTE. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Holden UTE weights approximately 123 kg more than 1968 AMC AMX.
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, 1968 AMC AMX (576 Nm @ 3200 RPM) has 271 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Holden UTE. (305 Nm @ 3600 RPM). This means 1968 AMC AMX will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Holden UTE.
Compare all specifications:
1968 AMC AMX | 2004 Holden UTE | |
Make | AMC | Holden |
Model | AMX | UTE |
Year Released | 1968 | 2004 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 6386 cc | 3791 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 315 HP | 204 HP |
Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 5200 RPM |
Torque | 576 Nm | 305 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3200 RPM | 3600 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 2 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1377 kg | 1500 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4510 mm | 5060 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1830 mm | 1850 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1320 mm | 1490 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2470 mm | 2950 mm |