1976 Ford Falcon vs. 1968 Triumph 2000
To start off, 1976 Ford Falcon is newer by 8 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1968 Triumph 2000. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1968 Triumph 2000 would be higher. At 5,763 cc (8 cylinders), 1976 Ford Falcon is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1976 Ford Falcon (256 HP @ 4600 RPM) has 167 more horse power than 1968 Triumph 2000. (89 HP @ 5000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1976 Ford Falcon should accelerate faster than 1968 Triumph 2000. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1976 Ford Falcon weights approximately 415 kg more than 1968 Triumph 2000. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 1976 Ford Falcon (491 Nm @ 2600 RPM) has 333 more torque (in Nm) than 1968 Triumph 2000. (158 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 1976 Ford Falcon will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1968 Triumph 2000.
Compare all specifications:
| 1976 Ford Falcon | 1968 Triumph 2000 | |
| Make | Ford | Triumph |
| Model | Falcon | 2000 |
| Year Released | 1976 | 1968 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5763 cc | 1998 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 256 HP | 89 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 5000 RPM |
| Torque | 491 Nm | 158 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2600 RPM | 3000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Vehicle Weight | 1585 kg | 1170 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 4420 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1910 mm | 1660 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1390 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2830 mm | 2700 mm |
