1996 Holden XU 6 vs. 2010 Toyota 4Runner
To start off, 2010 Toyota 4Runner 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 Toyota 4Runner 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 Toyota 4Runner. 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 274 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Toyota 4Runner. (241 Nm). This means 1996 Holden XU 6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Toyota 4Runner.
Compare all specifications:
| 1996 Holden XU 6 | 2010 Toyota 4Runner | |
| Make | Holden | Toyota |
| Model | XU 6 | 4Runner |
| Year Released | 1996 | 2010 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 157 HP |
| Torque | 515 Nm | 241 Nm |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
