1966 Citroen Ak 350 vs. 2000 Ford Falcon
To start off, 2000 Ford Falcon is newer by 34 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Citroen Ak 350. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Citroen Ak 350 would be higher. At 4,940 cc (8 cylinders), 2000 Ford Falcon is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Ford Falcon (270 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 248 more horse power than 1966 Citroen Ak 350. (22 HP @ 4500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2000 Ford Falcon should accelerate faster than 1966 Citroen Ak 350. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Ford Falcon weights approximately 670 kg more than 1966 Citroen Ak 350. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2000 Ford Falcon 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 2000 Ford Falcon. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1966 Citroen Ak 350, 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, 2000 Ford Falcon (420 Nm) has 379 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 Citroen Ak 350. (41 Nm). This means 2000 Ford Falcon will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1966 Citroen Ak 350.
Compare all specifications:
| 1966 Citroen Ak 350 | 2000 Ford Falcon | |
| Make | Citroen | Ford |
| Model | Ak 350 | Falcon |
| Year Released | 1966 | 2000 |
| Engine Size | 600 cc | 4940 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 2 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 22 HP | 270 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4500 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 41 Nm | 420 Nm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 8.8:1 | 9.1:1 |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 605 kg | 1275 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3610 mm | 4910 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1490 mm | 1880 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1710 mm | 1440 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2410 mm | 2800 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 19 L | 132 L |
