1952 Riley RM A vs. 2011 Ford Falcon
To start off, 2011 Ford Falcon is newer by 59 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1952 Riley RM A. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1952 Riley RM A would be higher. At 3,983 cc (6 cylinders), 2011 Ford Falcon is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2011 Ford Falcon weights approximately 469 kg more than 1952 Riley RM A.
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. 2011 Ford Falcon has automatic transmission and 1952 Riley RM A has manual transmission. 1952 Riley RM A will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2011 Ford Falcon will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 1952 Riley RM A | 2011 Ford Falcon | |
| Make | Riley | Ford |
| Model | RM A | Falcon |
| Year Released | 1952 | 2011 |
| Engine Size | 1496 cc | 3983 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 261 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed automatic |
| Vehicle Weight | 1235 kg | 1704 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4560 mm | 4967 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1620 mm | 1868 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1550 mm | 1433 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2870 mm | 2838 mm |
