1969 Audi Variant vs. 2012 Ford F-350
To start off, 2012 Ford F-350 is newer by 43 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1969 Audi Variant. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1969 Audi Variant would be higher. At 6,200 cc (8 cylinders), 2012 Ford F-350 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Ford F-350 (385 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 332 more horse power than 1969 Audi Variant. (53 HP @ 4750 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Ford F-350 should accelerate faster than 1969 Audi Variant.
Because 2012 Ford F-350 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 2012 Ford F-350. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1969 Audi Variant, 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, 2012 Ford F-350 (548 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 435 more torque (in Nm) than 1969 Audi Variant. (113 Nm @ 2500 RPM). This means 2012 Ford F-350 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1969 Audi Variant.
Compare all specifications:
| 1969 Audi Variant | 2012 Ford F-350 | |
| Make | Audi | Ford |
| Model | Variant | F-350 |
| Year Released | 1969 | 2012 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1696 cc | 6200 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 53 HP | 385 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4750 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Torque | 113 Nm | 548 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2500 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Flex Fuel |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Vehicle Length | 4390 mm | 6269 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1630 mm | 2029 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1961 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2500 mm | 3967 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 53 L | 132 L |
