1952 Holden FX vs. 1951 Hudson Hornet
To start off, 1952 Holden FX is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1951 Hudson Hornet. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1951 Hudson Hornet would be higher. At 4,810 cc (6 cylinders), 1951 Hudson Hornet is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1951 Hudson Hornet (143 HP) has 92 more horse power than 1952 Holden FX. (51 HP) In normal driving conditions, 1951 Hudson Hornet should accelerate faster than 1952 Holden FX. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1951 Hudson Hornet weights approximately 830 kg more than 1952 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 1952 Holden FX | 1951 Hudson Hornet | |
| Make | Holden | Hudson |
| Model | FX | Hornet |
| Year Released | 1952 | 1951 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2166 cc | 4810 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 51 HP | 143 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 970 kg | 1800 kg |
| Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1980 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2620 mm | 2990 mm |
