2002 AC Aceca vs. 1996 Holden XU 6
To start off, 2002 AC Aceca is newer by 6 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 2002 AC Aceca 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 2002 AC Aceca. 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 115 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 AC Aceca. (400 Nm). This means 1996 Holden XU 6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 AC Aceca.
Compare all specifications:
| 2002 AC Aceca | 1996 Holden XU 6 | |
| Make | AC | Holden |
| Model | Aceca | XU 6 |
| Year Released | 2002 | 1996 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 350 HP | 0 HP |
| Torque | 400 Nm | 515 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
