1949 Holden FX vs. 2010 Smart ForTwo
To start off, 2010 Smart ForTwo is newer by 61 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1949 Holden FX. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1949 Holden FX would be higher. At 2,166 cc (6 cylinders), 1949 Holden FX is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Smart ForTwo (70 HP) has 19 more horse power than 1949 Holden FX. (51 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Smart ForTwo should accelerate faster than 1949 Holden FX. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1949 Holden FX weights approximately 132 kg more than 2010 Smart ForTwo.
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. Let's talk about torque, 1949 Holden FX (136 Nm @ 2000 RPM) has 44 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Smart ForTwo. (92 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 1949 Holden FX will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Smart ForTwo.
Compare all specifications:
1949 Holden FX | 2010 Smart ForTwo | |
Make | Holden | Smart |
Model | FX | ForTwo |
Year Released | 1949 | 2010 |
Engine Position | Front | Rear |
Engine Size | 2166 cc | 1000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 51 HP | 70 HP |
Torque | 136 Nm | 92 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 4500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Vehicle Weight | 972 kg | 840 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4380 mm | 2695 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1560 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1580 mm | 1542 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2620 mm | 1867 mm |