1950 Holden FX vs. 2012 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2012 Ford Mustang is newer by 62 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 3,700 cc (6 cylinders), 2012 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Ford Mustang (305 HP) has 254 more horse power than 1950 Holden FX. (51 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 1950 Holden FX. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2012 Ford Mustang weights approximately 596 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, 2012 Ford Mustang (379 Nm @ 4250 RPM) has 243 more torque (in Nm) than 1950 Holden FX. (136 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 2012 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1950 Holden FX.
Compare all specifications:
| 1950 Holden FX | 2012 Ford Mustang | |
| Make | Holden | Ford |
| Model | FX | Mustang |
| Year Released | 1950 | 2012 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2165 cc | 3700 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 51 HP | 305 HP |
| Torque | 136 Nm | 379 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 4250 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 970 kg | 1566 kg |
