1996 Proton 300 vs. 2010 SSC Ultimate Aero
To start off, 2010 SSC Ultimate Aero is newer by 14 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Proton 300. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Proton 300 would be higher. At 6,350 cc (8 cylinders), 2010 SSC Ultimate Aero is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2010 SSC Ultimate Aero weights approximately 135 kg more than 1996 Proton 300.
Because 2010 SSC Ultimate Aero 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 SSC Ultimate Aero. 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 | 2010 SSC Ultimate Aero | |
| Make | Proton | SSC |
| Model | 300 | Ultimate Aero |
| Year Released | 1996 | 2010 |
| Engine Position | Front | Middle |
| Engine Size | 1834 cc | 6350 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 1269 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 1115 kg | 1250 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4000 mm | 4470 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 2080 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1090 mm |
