1950 Holden FX vs. 1963 Triumph Vitesse
To start off, 1963 Triumph Vitesse is newer by 13 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1950 Holden FX. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1950 Holden FX would be higher. At 2,165 cc (6 cylinders), 1950 Holden FX is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1963 Triumph Vitesse (70 HP) has 19 more horse power than 1950 Holden FX. (51 HP) In normal driving conditions, 1963 Triumph Vitesse should accelerate faster than 1950 Holden FX. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1950 Holden FX weights approximately 90 kg more than 1963 Triumph Vitesse.
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, 1950 Holden FX (136 Nm @ 2000 RPM) has 11 more torque (in Nm) than 1963 Triumph Vitesse. (125 Nm @ 2800 RPM). This means 1950 Holden FX will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1963 Triumph Vitesse.
Compare all specifications:
1950 Holden FX | 1963 Triumph Vitesse | |
Make | Holden | Triumph |
Model | FX | Vitesse |
Year Released | 1950 | 1963 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2165 cc | 1596 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 51 HP | 70 HP |
Torque | 136 Nm | 125 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 2800 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Vehicle Weight | 970 kg | 880 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4380 mm | 3890 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1530 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1580 mm | 1340 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2620 mm | 2270 mm |