1996 Holden XU 6 vs. 1990 Skoda Rapid R
To start off, 1996 Holden XU 6 is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1990 Skoda Rapid R. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1990 Skoda Rapid R would be higher.
Because 1990 Skoda Rapid R 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 1990 Skoda Rapid R. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1996 Holden XU 6, 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, 1996 Holden XU 6 (515 Nm) has 416 more torque (in Nm) than 1990 Skoda Rapid R. (99 Nm). This means 1996 Holden XU 6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1990 Skoda Rapid R. 1996 Holden XU 6 has automatic transmission and 1990 Skoda Rapid R has manual transmission. 1990 Skoda Rapid R will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 1996 Holden XU 6 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
1996 Holden XU 6 | 1990 Skoda Rapid R | |
Make | Holden | Skoda |
Model | XU 6 | Rapid R |
Year Released | 1996 | 1990 |
Engine Position | Front | Rear |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 62 HP |
Torque | 515 Nm | 99 Nm |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |