1956 Austin-Healey Tickford vs. 2012 Ford Falcon
To start off, 2012 Ford Falcon is newer by 56 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford would be higher. At 2,443 cc (4 cylinders), 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Ford Falcon (240 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 135 more horse power than 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford. (105 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Ford Falcon should accelerate faster than 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2012 Ford Falcon weights approximately 118 kg more than 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2012 Ford Falcon (353 Nm @ 2000 RPM) has 169 more torque (in Nm) than 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford. (184 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2012 Ford Falcon will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford.
Compare all specifications:
| 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford | 2012 Ford Falcon | |
| Make | Austin-Healey | Ford |
| Model | Tickford | Falcon |
| Year Released | 1956 | 2012 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2443 cc | 1999 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 105 HP | 240 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Torque | 184 Nm | 353 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 2000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Vehicle Weight | 1530 kg | 1648 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 4967 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1868 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1433 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 2838 mm |
