1969 Ford Thunderbird vs. 2009 Suzuki Equator
To start off, 2009 Suzuki Equator is newer by 40 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1969 Ford Thunderbird. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1969 Ford Thunderbird would be higher. At 7,029 cc (8 cylinders), 1969 Ford Thunderbird is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1969 Ford Thunderbird (355 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 205 more horse power than 2009 Suzuki Equator. (150 HP @ 5600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1969 Ford Thunderbird should accelerate faster than 2009 Suzuki Equator.
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, 1969 Ford Thunderbird (300 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 129 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Suzuki Equator. (171 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 1969 Ford Thunderbird will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Suzuki Equator.
Compare all specifications:
1969 Ford Thunderbird | 2009 Suzuki Equator | |
Make | Ford | Suzuki |
Model | Thunderbird | Equator |
Year Released | 1969 | 2009 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 7029 cc | 2501 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 355 HP | 150 HP |
Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 5600 RPM |
Torque | 300 Nm | 171 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 10.5:1 | 9.5:1 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Wheelbase Size | 2900 mm | 3200 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 14.7 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 29.4 L/100km | 15.7 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 91 L | 80 L |