1966 Ford Falcon vs. 2009 Holden UTE
To start off, 2009 Holden UTE is newer by 43 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 6,000 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 Holden UTE is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Holden UTE (357 HP) has 251 more horse power than 1966 Ford Falcon. (106 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Holden UTE 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, 2009 Holden UTE (530 Nm) has 342 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 Ford Falcon. (188 Nm). This means 2009 Holden UTE will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1966 Ford Falcon.
Compare all specifications:
| 1966 Ford Falcon | 2009 Holden UTE | |
| Make | Ford | Holden |
| Model | Falcon | UTE |
| Year Released | 1966 | 2009 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2782 cc | 6000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 106 HP | 357 HP |
| Torque | 188 Nm | 530 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
