1968 Austin 3-Litre vs. 1978 Mitsubishi Colt
To start off, 1978 Mitsubishi Colt is newer by 10 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1968 Austin 3-Litre. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1968 Austin 3-Litre would be higher. At 2,912 cc (6 cylinders), 1968 Austin 3-Litre is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1968 Austin 3-Litre weights approximately 680 kg more than 1978 Mitsubishi Colt.
Because 1968 Austin 3-Litre 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 1968 Austin 3-Litre. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1978 Mitsubishi Colt, 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:
1968 Austin 3-Litre | 1978 Mitsubishi Colt | |
Make | Austin | Mitsubishi |
Model | 3-Litre | Colt |
Year Released | 1968 | 1978 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2912 cc | 1244 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 124 HP | 0 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Vehicle Weight | 1490 kg | 810 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4720 mm | 3800 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1700 mm | 1590 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1360 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2940 mm | 2310 mm |