1996 Holden XU 6 vs. 2010 Holden UTE
To start off, 2010 Holden UTE is newer by 14 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Holden XU 6. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Holden XU 6 would be higher.
Because 2010 Holden UTE 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 2010 Holden UTE. 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 185 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Holden UTE. (330 Nm). This means 1996 Holden XU 6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Holden UTE. 1996 Holden XU 6 has automatic transmission and 2010 Holden UTE has manual transmission. 2010 Holden UTE 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 | 2010 Holden UTE | |
| Make | Holden | Holden |
| Model | XU 6 | UTE |
| Year Released | 1996 | 2010 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 242 HP |
| Torque | 515 Nm | 330 Nm |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
