1952 Holden FX vs. 2006 Mazda RX-8
To start off, 2006 Mazda RX-8 is newer by 54 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, 2006 Mazda RX-8 (228 HP) has 177 more horse power than 1952 Holden FX. (51 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Mazda RX-8 should accelerate faster than 1952 Holden FX. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Mazda RX-8 weights approximately 458 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. Let's talk about torque, 2006 Mazda RX-8 (211 Nm @ 5500 RPM) has 75 more torque (in Nm) than 1952 Holden FX. (136 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 2006 Mazda RX-8 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1952 Holden FX.
Compare all specifications:
1952 Holden FX | 2006 Mazda RX-8 | |
Make | Holden | Mazda |
Model | FX | RX-8 |
Year Released | 1952 | 2006 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2166 cc | 1308 cc |
Engine Type | in-line | dual-disk rotary |
Horse Power | 51 HP | 228 HP |
Torque | 136 Nm | 211 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 5500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Vehicle Weight | 970 kg | 1428 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4380 mm | 4440 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1780 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1580 mm | 1350 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2620 mm | 2710 mm |