1955 Buick 40 vs. 2000 Ford Falcon
To start off, 2000 Ford Falcon is newer by 45 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1955 Buick 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1955 Buick 40 would be higher. At 5,277 cc (8 cylinders), 1955 Buick 40 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1955 Buick 40 (234 HP @ 4600 RPM) has 14 more horse power than 2000 Ford Falcon. (220 HP @ 5000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1955 Buick 40 should accelerate faster than 2000 Ford Falcon. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1955 Buick 40 weights approximately 207 kg more than 2000 Ford Falcon. 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, 1955 Buick 40 (447 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 90 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Ford Falcon. (357 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 1955 Buick 40 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Ford Falcon.
Compare all specifications:
1955 Buick 40 | 2000 Ford Falcon | |
Make | Buick | Ford |
Model | 40 | Falcon |
Year Released | 1955 | 2000 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5277 cc | 3984 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 234 HP | 220 HP |
Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 5000 RPM |
Torque | 447 Nm | 357 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 3000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Vehicle Weight | 1725 kg | 1518 kg |
Wheelbase Size | 3110 mm | 2800 mm |