1959 Holden FC vs. 1952 Riley RM A
To start off, 1959 Holden FC is newer by 7 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 2,166 cc (6 cylinders), 1959 Holden FC is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1952 Riley RM A weights approximately 251 kg more than 1959 Holden FC.
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.
Compare all specifications:
| 1959 Holden FC | 1952 Riley RM A | |
| Make | Holden | Riley |
| Model | FC | RM A |
| Year Released | 1959 | 1952 |
| Engine Size | 2166 cc | 1496 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 62 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 984 kg | 1235 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4480 mm | 4560 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1620 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1560 mm | 1550 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2670 mm | 2870 mm |
