1952 Holden FX vs. 1983 Ford Ranger
To start off, 1983 Ford Ranger is newer by 31 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1952 Holden FX. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1952 Holden FX would be higher. At 3,000 cc (6 cylinders), 1983 Ford Ranger is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1983 Ford Ranger (145 HP) has 94 more horse power than 1952 Holden FX. (51 HP) In normal driving conditions, 1983 Ford Ranger should accelerate faster than 1952 Holden FX.
Because 1983 Ford Ranger is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1952 Holden FX. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1983 Ford Ranger will offer significantly more control. 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. 1983 Ford Ranger has automatic transmission and 1952 Holden FX has manual transmission. 1952 Holden FX will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 1983 Ford Ranger will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 1952 Holden FX | 1983 Ford Ranger | |
| Make | Holden | Ford |
| Model | FX | Ranger |
| Year Released | 1952 | 1983 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2166 cc | 3000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 51 HP | 145 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
| Vehicle Length | 4380 mm | 4690 mm |
