2004 Eagle Vision vs. 1965 Holden EH
To start off, 2004 Eagle Vision is newer by 39 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 Holden EH. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 Holden EH would be higher. At 2,930 cc (6 cylinders), 1965 Holden EH is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Eagle Vision (197 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 97 more horse power than 1965 Holden EH. (100 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Eagle Vision should accelerate faster than 1965 Holden EH. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Eagle Vision weights approximately 385 kg more than 1965 Holden EH. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 1965 Holden EH 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 1965 Holden EH. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Eagle Vision, 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Eagle Vision | 1965 Holden EH | |
| Make | Eagle | Holden |
| Model | Vision | EH |
| Year Released | 2004 | 1965 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2698 cc | 2930 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 197 HP | 100 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Vehicle Weight | 1570 kg | 1185 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5320 mm | 4560 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1910 mm | 1740 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1490 mm |
