2001 AC Aceca vs. 1952 Holden FX
To start off, 2001 AC Aceca is newer by 49 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 3,506 cc (8 cylinders), 2001 AC Aceca is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2001 AC Aceca (346 HP) has 295 more horse power than 1952 Holden FX. (51 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2001 AC Aceca should accelerate faster than 1952 Holden FX. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2001 AC Aceca weights approximately 640 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, 2001 AC Aceca (400 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 264 more torque (in Nm) than 1952 Holden FX. (136 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 2001 AC Aceca will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1952 Holden FX.
Compare all specifications:
| 2001 AC Aceca | 1952 Holden FX | |
| Make | AC | Holden |
| Model | Aceca | FX |
| Year Released | 2001 | 1952 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3506 cc | 2166 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 346 HP | 51 HP |
| Torque | 400 Nm | 136 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 2000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 1610 kg | 970 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4640 mm | 4380 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1710 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1580 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2300 mm | 2620 mm |
