1963 Holden EJ vs. 2004 Toyota Tundra
To start off, 2004 Toyota Tundra is newer by 41 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 3,376 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Toyota Tundra is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Toyota Tundra (190 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 126 more horse power than 1963 Holden EJ. (64 HP @ 4200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2004 Toyota Tundra should accelerate faster than 1963 Holden EJ. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Toyota Tundra weights approximately 646 kg more than 1963 Holden EJ. 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, 2004 Toyota Tundra (298 Nm) has 135 more torque (in Nm) than 1963 Holden EJ. (163 Nm). This means 2004 Toyota Tundra will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1963 Holden EJ.
Compare all specifications:
1963 Holden EJ | 2004 Toyota Tundra | |
Make | Holden | Toyota |
Model | EJ | Tundra |
Year Released | 1963 | 2004 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2262 cc | 3376 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 64 HP | 190 HP |
Engine RPM | 4200 RPM | 5200 RPM |
Torque | 163 Nm | 298 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Vehicle Weight | 1134 kg | 1780 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 5530 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1740 mm | 1920 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1480 mm | 1800 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 3270 mm |