1966 Ford Falcon vs. 1979 Volvo 164
To start off, 1979 Volvo 164 is newer by 13 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Ford Falcon. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Ford Falcon would be higher. At 2,782 cc (6 cylinders), 1966 Ford Falcon is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1979 Volvo 164 (138 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 32 more horse power than 1966 Ford Falcon. (106 HP @ 4200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1979 Volvo 164 should accelerate faster than 1966 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, 1979 Volvo 164 (205 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 17 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 Ford Falcon. (188 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 1979 Volvo 164 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1966 Ford Falcon.
Compare all specifications:
1966 Ford Falcon | 1979 Volvo 164 | |
Make | Ford | Volvo |
Model | Falcon | 164 |
Year Released | 1966 | 1979 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2782 cc | 2664 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 106 HP | 138 HP |
Engine RPM | 4200 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 188 Nm | 205 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 3000 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4700 mm | 5610 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1880 mm | 1720 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 1440 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2720 mm | 3350 mm |