1964 Ford Falcon vs. 1980 Holden Commodore
To start off, 1980 Holden Commodore is newer by 16 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Ford Falcon. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Ford Falcon would be higher. At 2,890 cc (8 cylinders), 1964 Ford Falcon is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1964 Ford Falcon (282 HP @ 4400 RPM) has 180 more horse power than 1980 Holden Commodore. (102 HP @ 4400 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1964 Ford Falcon should accelerate faster than 1980 Holden Commodore. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1980 Holden Commodore weights approximately 520 kg more than 1964 Ford Falcon.
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, 1964 Ford Falcon (244 Nm @ 2800 RPM) has 52 more torque (in Nm) than 1980 Holden Commodore. (192 Nm @ 2800 RPM). This means 1964 Ford Falcon will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1980 Holden Commodore.
Compare all specifications:
| 1964 Ford Falcon | 1980 Holden Commodore | |
| Make | Ford | Holden |
| Model | Falcon | Commodore |
| Year Released | 1964 | 1980 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2890 cc | 2838 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 282 HP | 102 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4400 RPM | 4400 RPM |
| Torque | 244 Nm | 192 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2800 RPM | 2800 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 700 kg | 1220 kg |
