1996 Ford Falcon vs. 1963 Lincoln Continental
To start off, 1996 Ford Falcon is newer by 33 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Lincoln Continental. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Lincoln Continental would be higher. At 7,048 cc (8 cylinders), 1963 Lincoln Continental is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1963 Lincoln Continental (284 HP @ 4600 RPM) has 56 more horse power than 1996 Ford Falcon. (228 HP @ 4500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1963 Lincoln Continental should accelerate faster than 1996 Ford Falcon. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1963 Lincoln Continental weights approximately 820 kg more than 1996 Ford Falcon. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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.
Compare all specifications:
| 1996 Ford Falcon | 1963 Lincoln Continental | |
| Make | Ford | Lincoln |
| Model | Falcon | Continental |
| Year Released | 1996 | 1963 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3707 cc | 7048 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 228 HP | 284 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4500 RPM | 4600 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1580 kg | 2400 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4910 mm | 5500 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1870 mm | 2000 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2800 mm | 3210 mm |
