1968 Austin 3-Litre vs. 2012 Ford F-250
To start off, 2012 Ford F-250 is newer by 44 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 6,200 cc (8 cylinders), 2012 Ford F-250 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Ford F-250 (385 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 261 more horse power than 1968 Austin 3-Litre. (124 HP @ 4500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Ford F-250 should accelerate faster than 1968 Austin 3-Litre.
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, 2012 Ford F-250 (548 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 329 more torque (in Nm) than 1968 Austin 3-Litre. (219 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2012 Ford F-250 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1968 Austin 3-Litre.
Compare all specifications:
1968 Austin 3-Litre | 2012 Ford F-250 | |
Make | Austin | Ford |
Model | 3-Litre | F-250 |
Year Released | 1968 | 2012 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2912 cc | 6200 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 124 HP | 385 HP |
Engine RPM | 4500 RPM | 5500 RPM |
Torque | 219 Nm | 548 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 4500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Flex Fuel |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Vehicle Length | 4720 mm | 6269 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1700 mm | 2029 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1966 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2940 mm | 3967 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 65 L | 132 L |