1950 Holden FX vs. 2006 Mazda 3
To start off, 2006 Mazda 3 is newer by 56 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, 2006 Mazda 3 (139 HP) has 88 more horse power than 1950 Holden FX. (51 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Mazda 3 should accelerate faster than 1950 Holden FX. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Mazda 3 weights approximately 164 kg more than 1950 Holden FX. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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, 2006 Mazda 3 (182 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 46 more torque (in Nm) than 1950 Holden FX. (136 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 2006 Mazda 3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1950 Holden FX.
Compare all specifications:
1950 Holden FX | 2006 Mazda 3 | |
Make | Holden | Mazda |
Model | FX | 3 |
Year Released | 1950 | 2006 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2165 cc | 1998 cc |
Horse Power | 51 HP | 139 HP |
Torque | 136 Nm | 182 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 4500 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Vehicle Weight | 970 kg | 1134 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4380 mm | 4710 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1580 mm | 1490 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2620 mm | 2650 mm |