1950 Holden FX vs. 2003 MCC Crossblade
To start off, 2003 MCC Crossblade is newer by 53 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, 2003 MCC Crossblade (70 HP) has 19 more horse power than 1950 Holden FX. (51 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2003 MCC Crossblade should accelerate faster than 1950 Holden FX. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1950 Holden FX weights approximately 230 kg more than 2003 MCC Crossblade.
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 34 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 MCC Crossblade. (102 Nm @ 3210 RPM). This means 1950 Holden FX will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 MCC Crossblade.
Compare all specifications:
| 1950 Holden FX | 2003 MCC Crossblade | |
| Make | Holden | MCC |
| Model | FX | Crossblade |
| Year Released | 1950 | 2003 |
| Engine Size | 2165 cc | 598 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 51 HP | 70 HP |
| Torque | 136 Nm | 102 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 3210 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 970 kg | 740 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4380 mm | 2630 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1630 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1580 mm | 1520 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2620 mm | 1810 mm |
