1963 Holden EJ vs. 2003 Renault Megane
To start off, 2003 Renault Megane is newer by 40 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Holden EJ. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Holden EJ would be higher. At 2,262 cc (6 cylinders), 1963 Holden EJ is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Renault Megane (114 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 50 more horse power than 1963 Holden EJ. (64 HP @ 4200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2003 Renault Megane should accelerate faster than 1963 Holden EJ.
Because 1963 Holden EJ is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 1963 Holden EJ. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Renault Megane, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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, 1963 Holden EJ (163 Nm) has 11 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Renault Megane. (152 Nm). This means 1963 Holden EJ will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Renault Megane.
Compare all specifications:
| 1963 Holden EJ | 2003 Renault Megane | |
| Make | Holden | Renault |
| Model | EJ | Megane |
| Year Released | 1963 | 2003 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2262 cc | 1598 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 64 HP | 114 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4200 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 163 Nm | 152 Nm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 4510 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1740 mm | 1780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1480 mm | 1470 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 2690 mm |
