1963 Holden EJ vs. 2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee
To start off, 2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee is newer by 42 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 3,704 cc (6 cylinders), 2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee (210 HP @ 3800 RPM) has 146 more horse power than 1963 Holden EJ. (64 HP @ 4200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee should accelerate faster than 1963 Holden EJ.
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, 2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee (319 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 156 more torque (in Nm) than 1963 Holden EJ. (163 Nm @ 1400 RPM). This means 2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1963 Holden EJ.
Compare all specifications:
| 1963 Holden EJ | 2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee | |
| Make | Holden | Jeep |
| Model | EJ | Grand Cherokee |
| Year Released | 1963 | 2005 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2262 cc | 3704 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 64 HP | 210 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4200 RPM | 3800 RPM |
| Torque | 163 Nm | 319 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 1400 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 4750 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1740 mm | 1870 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1480 mm | 1730 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 2790 mm |
