1993 Chrysler ES vs. 2005 Ford Falcon
To start off, 2005 Ford Falcon is newer by 12 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1993 Chrysler ES. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1993 Chrysler ES would be higher. At 3,984 cc (6 cylinders), 2005 Ford Falcon is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Ford Falcon (200 HP @ 4900 RPM) has 107 more horse power than 1993 Chrysler ES. (93 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2005 Ford Falcon should accelerate faster than 1993 Chrysler ES. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Ford Falcon weights approximately 436 kg more than 1993 Chrysler ES. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2005 Ford Falcon 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 2005 Ford Falcon. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1993 Chrysler ES, 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, 2005 Ford Falcon (357 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 191 more torque (in Nm) than 1993 Chrysler ES. (166 Nm @ 3200 RPM). This means 2005 Ford Falcon will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1993 Chrysler ES.
Compare all specifications:
| 1993 Chrysler ES | 2005 Ford Falcon | |
| Make | Chrysler | Ford |
| Model | ES | Falcon |
| Year Released | 1993 | 2005 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2213 cc | 3984 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 93 HP | 200 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 4900 RPM |
| Torque | 166 Nm | 357 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3200 RPM | 3000 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 87.6 mm | 92.4 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 92 mm | 99.3 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 8.1:1 | 9.6:1 |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1145 kg | 1581 kg |
| Wheelbase Size | 2470 mm | 2930 mm |
