1954 Austin-Healey Tickford vs. 1951 Holden FX
To start off, 1954 Austin-Healey Tickford is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1951 Holden FX. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1951 Holden FX would be higher. At 2,443 cc (4 cylinders), 1954 Austin-Healey Tickford is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1954 Austin-Healey Tickford (105 HP @ 4800 RPM) has 54 more horse power than 1951 Holden FX. (51 HP @ 3800 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1954 Austin-Healey Tickford should accelerate faster than 1951 Holden FX. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1954 Austin-Healey Tickford weights approximately 560 kg more than 1951 Holden FX. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 1954 Austin-Healey Tickford (184 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 48 more torque (in Nm) than 1951 Holden FX. (136 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 1954 Austin-Healey Tickford will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1951 Holden FX.
Compare all specifications:
| 1954 Austin-Healey Tickford | 1951 Holden FX | |
| Make | Austin-Healey | Holden |
| Model | Tickford | FX |
| Year Released | 1954 | 1951 |
| Engine Size | 2443 cc | 2166 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 105 HP | 51 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 3800 RPM |
| Torque | 184 Nm | 136 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 2000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Vehicle Weight | 1530 kg | 970 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 4380 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1710 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1580 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 2620 mm |
