2000 Holden HRT vs. 1966 Rover P5
To start off, 2000 Holden HRT is newer by 34 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Rover P5. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Rover P5 would be higher. At 5,000 cc (8 cylinders), 2000 Holden HRT is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 1966 Rover P5 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 1966 Rover P5. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Holden HRT, 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, 2000 Holden HRT (815 Nm) has 598 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 Rover P5. (217 Nm). This means 2000 Holden HRT will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1966 Rover P5. 1966 Rover P5 has automatic transmission and 2000 Holden HRT has manual transmission. 2000 Holden HRT will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 1966 Rover P5 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Holden HRT | 1966 Rover P5 | |
| Make | Holden | Rover |
| Model | HRT | P5 |
| Year Released | 2000 | 1966 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5000 cc | 2995 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 122 HP |
| Torque | 815 Nm | 217 Nm |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
