1963 Holden EJ vs. 2012 Chevrolet Malibu
To start off, 2012 Chevrolet Malibu is newer by 49 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 2,400 cc (4 cylinders), 2012 Chevrolet Malibu is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Chevrolet Malibu (169 HP @ 6400 RPM) has 105 more horse power than 1963 Holden EJ. (64 HP @ 4200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Chevrolet Malibu 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, 2012 Chevrolet Malibu, 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, 2012 Chevrolet Malibu (217 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 54 more torque (in Nm) than 1963 Holden EJ. (163 Nm @ 1400 RPM). This means 2012 Chevrolet Malibu will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1963 Holden EJ.
Compare all specifications:
1963 Holden EJ | 2012 Chevrolet Malibu | |
Make | Holden | Chevrolet |
Model | EJ | Malibu |
Year Released | 1963 | 2012 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2262 cc | 2400 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 64 HP | 169 HP |
Engine RPM | 4200 RPM | 6400 RPM |
Torque | 163 Nm | 217 Nm |
Torque RPM | 1400 RPM | 4500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 4872 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1740 mm | 1786 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1480 mm | 1450 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 2852 mm |