1950 Holden FX vs. 2009 Smart ForTwo
To start off, 2009 Smart ForTwo is newer by 59 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, 2009 Smart ForTwo (70 HP) has 19 more horse power than 1950 Holden FX. (51 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Smart ForTwo should accelerate faster than 1950 Holden FX.
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 44 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Smart ForTwo. (92 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 1950 Holden FX will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Smart ForTwo.
Compare all specifications:
| 1950 Holden FX | 2009 Smart ForTwo | |
| Make | Holden | Smart |
| Model | FX | ForTwo |
| Year Released | 1950 | 2009 |
| Engine Position | Front | Rear |
| Engine Size | 2165 cc | 999 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 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 Length | 4380 mm | 2700 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1550 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1580 mm | 1570 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2620 mm | 1870 mm |
