1968 Holden Brougham vs. 2000 Toyota Tundra
To start off, 2000 Toyota Tundra is newer by 32 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1968 Holden Brougham. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1968 Holden Brougham would be higher. At 5,025 cc (8 cylinders), 1968 Holden Brougham is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Toyota Tundra (242 HP @ 4800 RPM) has 60 more horse power than 1968 Holden Brougham. (182 HP @ 4600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2000 Toyota Tundra should accelerate faster than 1968 Holden Brougham.
Because 2000 Toyota Tundra is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1968 Holden Brougham. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Toyota Tundra will offer significantly more control. 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, 2000 Toyota Tundra (426 Nm @ 3400 RPM) has 19 more torque (in Nm) than 1968 Holden Brougham. (407 Nm @ 2400 RPM). This means 2000 Toyota Tundra will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1968 Holden Brougham.
Compare all specifications:
| 1968 Holden Brougham | 2000 Toyota Tundra | |
| Make | Holden | Toyota |
| Model | Brougham | Tundra |
| Year Released | 1968 | 2000 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5025 cc | 4663 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 182 HP | 242 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 4800 RPM |
| Torque | 407 Nm | 426 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2400 RPM | 3400 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Vehicle Length | 4890 mm | 5530 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1830 mm | 1920 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 1800 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2830 mm | 3270 mm |
