1952 Holden FX vs. 2005 Ford Ecosport
To start off, 2005 Ford Ecosport is newer by 53 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 2,166 cc (6 cylinders), 1952 Holden FX is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Ford Ecosport (67 HP) has 16 more horse power than 1952 Holden FX. (51 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2005 Ford Ecosport should accelerate faster than 1952 Holden FX.
Because 1952 Holden FX is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 1952 Holden FX. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 Ford Ecosport, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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 | 2005 Ford Ecosport | |
Make | Holden | Ford |
Model | FX | Ecosport |
Year Released | 1952 | 2005 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2166 cc | 1400 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 51 HP | 67 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Vehicle Length | 4380 mm | 4228 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1980 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1580 mm | 1679 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2620 mm | 2490 mm |