1996 Ford Synergy 2010 vs. 2013 Chevrolet Impala
To start off, 2013 Chevrolet Impala is newer by 17 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Ford Synergy 2010. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Ford Synergy 2010 would be higher. At 3,600 cc (6 cylinders), 2013 Chevrolet Impala is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 1996 Ford Synergy 2010 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 1996 Ford Synergy 2010. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2013 Chevrolet Impala, 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:
| 1996 Ford Synergy 2010 | 2013 Chevrolet Impala | |
| Make | Ford | Chevrolet |
| Model | Synergy 2010 | Impala |
| Year Released | 1996 | 2013 |
| Engine Position | Middle | Front |
| Engine Size | 999 cc | 3600 cc |
| Engine Type | electric | V |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 296 HP |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | 6-speed automatic |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
