1981 Holden Commodore vs. 2012 Ford Ecosport
To start off, 2012 Ford Ecosport is newer by 31 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1981 Holden Commodore. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1981 Holden Commodore would be higher. At 1,892 cc (4 cylinders), 1981 Holden Commodore is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Ford Ecosport (118 HP) has 40 more horse power than 1981 Holden Commodore. (78 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Ford Ecosport should accelerate faster than 1981 Holden Commodore.
Because 1981 Holden Commodore 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 1981 Holden Commodore. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 Ford Ecosport, 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, 2012 Ford Ecosport (170 Nm @ 1300 RPM) has 30 more torque (in Nm) than 1981 Holden Commodore. (140 Nm @ 2400 RPM). This means 2012 Ford Ecosport will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1981 Holden Commodore.
Compare all specifications:
1981 Holden Commodore | 2012 Ford Ecosport | |
Make | Holden | Ford |
Model | Commodore | Ecosport |
Year Released | 1981 | 2012 |
Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1892 cc | 1000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 78 HP | 118 HP |
Torque | 140 Nm | 170 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2400 RPM | 1300 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |