1992 Holden Apollo vs. 1938 Alfa Romeo 6C
To start off, 1992 Holden Apollo is newer by 54 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1938 Alfa Romeo 6C. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1938 Alfa Romeo 6C would be higher. At 2,442 cc (6 cylinders), 1938 Alfa Romeo 6C is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1992 Holden Apollo (118 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 29 more horse power than 1938 Alfa Romeo 6C. (89 HP @ 4600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1992 Holden Apollo should accelerate faster than 1938 Alfa Romeo 6C. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1938 Alfa Romeo 6C weights approximately 295 kg more than 1992 Holden Apollo.
Because 1938 Alfa Romeo 6C 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 1938 Alfa Romeo 6C. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1992 Holden Apollo, 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:
| 1992 Holden Apollo | 1938 Alfa Romeo 6C | |
| Make | Holden | Alfa Romeo |
| Model | Apollo | 6C |
| Year Released | 1992 | 1938 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1998 cc | 2442 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 118 HP | 89 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 4600 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 1205 kg | 1500 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4510 mm | 4880 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1840 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1410 mm | 1510 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2610 mm | 3010 mm |
