1996 Proton 300 vs. 1963 Reliant Sabre Six
To start off, 1996 Proton 300 is newer by 33 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Reliant Sabre Six. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Reliant Sabre Six would be higher. At 2,553 cc (6 cylinders), 1963 Reliant Sabre Six is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1996 Proton 300 weights approximately 317 kg more than 1963 Reliant Sabre Six.
Because 1963 Reliant Sabre Six 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 1963 Reliant Sabre Six. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1996 Proton 300, 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 Proton 300 | 1963 Reliant Sabre Six | |
Make | Proton | Reliant |
Model | 300 | Sabre Six |
Year Released | 1996 | 1963 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1834 cc | 2553 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 108 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Vehicle Weight | 1115 kg | 798 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4000 mm | 4060 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1280 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2450 mm | 2290 mm |