2003 Dodge Ram vs. 1952 Holden FX
To start off, 2003 Dodge Ram is newer by 51 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 8,277 cc (10 cylinders), 2003 Dodge Ram is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Dodge Ram (500 HP) has 449 more horse power than 1952 Holden FX. (51 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2003 Dodge Ram should accelerate faster than 1952 Holden FX. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Dodge Ram weights approximately 1304 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, 2003 Dodge Ram (732 Nm) has 596 more torque (in Nm) than 1952 Holden FX. (136 Nm). This means 2003 Dodge Ram will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1952 Holden FX.
Compare all specifications:
2003 Dodge Ram | 1952 Holden FX | |
Make | Dodge | Holden |
Model | Ram | FX |
Year Released | 2003 | 1952 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 8277 cc | 2166 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 10 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 500 HP | 51 HP |
Torque | 732 Nm | 136 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Vehicle Weight | 2274 kg | 970 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5170 mm | 4380 mm |
Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1710 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1900 mm | 1580 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3030 mm | 2620 mm |