1968 Austin 3-Litre vs. 1996 Mitsubishi Carisma
To start off, 1996 Mitsubishi Carisma is newer by 28 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. In terms of performance, 1968 Austin 3-Litre (124 HP @ 4500 RPM) has 35 more horse power than 1996 Mitsubishi Carisma. (89 HP @ 4250 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1968 Austin 3-Litre should accelerate faster than 1996 Mitsubishi Carisma.
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, 1996 Mitsubishi Carisma, 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, 1968 Austin 3-Litre (219 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 43 more torque (in Nm) than 1996 Mitsubishi Carisma. (176 Nm @ 2250 RPM). This means 1968 Austin 3-Litre will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1996 Mitsubishi Carisma.
Compare all specifications:
1968 Austin 3-Litre | 1996 Mitsubishi Carisma | |
Make | Austin | Mitsubishi |
Model | 3-Litre | Carisma |
Year Released | 1968 | 1996 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2912 cc | 1870 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 124 HP | 89 HP |
Engine RPM | 4500 RPM | 4250 RPM |
Torque | 219 Nm | 176 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 2250 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Vehicle Length | 4720 mm | 4440 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1700 mm | 1700 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1410 mm |