2000 BMW Z3 vs. 1952 Holden FX
To start off, 2000 BMW Z3 is newer by 48 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1952 Holden FX. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1952 Holden FX would be higher. At 2,926 cc (6 cylinders), 2000 BMW Z3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 BMW Z3 (227 HP) has 176 more horse power than 1952 Holden FX. (51 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2000 BMW Z3 should accelerate faster than 1952 Holden FX. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 BMW Z3 weights approximately 390 kg more than 1952 Holden FX. 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. Let's talk about torque, 2000 BMW Z3 (300 Nm @ 3500 RPM) has 164 more torque (in Nm) than 1952 Holden FX. (136 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 2000 BMW Z3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1952 Holden FX.
Compare all specifications:
2000 BMW Z3 | 1952 Holden FX | |
Make | BMW | Holden |
Model | Z3 | FX |
Year Released | 2000 | 1952 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2926 cc | 2166 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 227 HP | 51 HP |
Torque | 300 Nm | 136 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3500 RPM | 2000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Vehicle Weight | 1360 kg | 970 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4060 mm | 4380 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1750 mm | 1710 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1300 mm | 1580 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2450 mm | 2620 mm |