1963 Holden EJ vs. 2012 Mercedes-Benz E
To start off, 2012 Mercedes-Benz E 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 2,262 cc (6 cylinders), 1963 Holden EJ is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Mercedes-Benz E (168 HP @ 3000 RPM) has 104 more horse power than 1963 Holden EJ. (64 HP @ 4200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Mercedes-Benz E should accelerate faster than 1963 Holden EJ. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2012 Mercedes-Benz E weights approximately 536 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, 2012 Mercedes-Benz E (400 Nm @ 1400 RPM) has 237 more torque (in Nm) than 1963 Holden EJ. (163 Nm @ 1400 RPM). This means 2012 Mercedes-Benz E will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1963 Holden EJ.
Compare all specifications:
| 1963 Holden EJ | 2012 Mercedes-Benz E | |
| Make | Holden | Mercedes-Benz |
| Model | EJ | E |
| Year Released | 1963 | 2012 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2262 cc | 2143 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 64 HP | 168 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4200 RPM | 3000 RPM |
| Torque | 163 Nm | 400 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 1400 RPM | 1400 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 1134 kg | 1670 kg |
