1969 Bristol 410 vs. 1996 Acura TL
To start off, 1996 Acura TL is newer by 27 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1969 Bristol 410. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1969 Bristol 410 would be higher. At 5,211 cc (8 cylinders), 1969 Bristol 410 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1969 Bristol 410 (215 HP) has 39 more horse power than 1996 Acura TL. (176 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1969 Bristol 410 should accelerate faster than 1996 Acura TL.
Because 1969 Bristol 410 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 1969 Bristol 410. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1996 Acura TL, 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:
1969 Bristol 410 | 1996 Acura TL | |
Make | Bristol | Acura |
Model | 410 | TL |
Year Released | 1969 | 1996 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5211 cc | 2500 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 5 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 215 HP | 176 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4920 mm | 4864 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1740 mm | 1786 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1510 mm | 1405 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2910 mm | 2840 mm |