1952 Holden FX vs. 2006 Volkswagen Golf
To start off, 2006 Volkswagen Golf 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 Volkswagen Golf (168 HP) has 117 more horse power than 1952 Holden FX. (51 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Volkswagen Golf 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, 2006 Volkswagen Golf, 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. Let's talk about torque, 2006 Volkswagen Golf (240 Nm @ 1750 RPM) has 104 more torque (in Nm) than 1952 Holden FX. (136 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 2006 Volkswagen Golf will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1952 Holden FX.
Compare all specifications:
1952 Holden FX | 2006 Volkswagen Golf | |
Make | Holden | Volkswagen |
Model | FX | Golf |
Year Released | 1952 | 2006 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2166 cc | 1390 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 51 HP | 168 HP |
Torque | 136 Nm | 240 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 1750 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Vehicle Length | 4380 mm | 4210 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1770 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1580 mm | 1490 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2620 mm | 2580 mm |