1946 Alfa Romeo 6C vs. 2000 Ford Falcon
To start off, 2000 Ford Falcon is newer by 54 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1946 Alfa Romeo 6C. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1946 Alfa Romeo 6C would be higher. At 4,942 cc (8 cylinders), 2000 Ford Falcon is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Ford Falcon (268 HP @ 5000 RPM) has 179 more horse power than 1946 Alfa Romeo 6C. (89 HP @ 4600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2000 Ford Falcon should accelerate faster than 1946 Alfa Romeo 6C. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1946 Alfa Romeo 6C weights approximately 202 kg more than 2000 Ford Falcon.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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:
1946 Alfa Romeo 6C | 2000 Ford Falcon | |
Make | Alfa Romeo | Ford |
Model | 6C | Falcon |
Year Released | 1946 | 2000 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2443 cc | 4942 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 89 HP | 268 HP |
Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 5000 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1500 kg | 1298 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4880 mm | 4910 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1840 mm | 1880 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1510 mm | 1440 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3010 mm | 2800 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 77 L | 68 L |