2004 Ford Thunderbird vs. 1963 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud
To start off, 2004 Ford Thunderbird is newer by 41 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud would be higher. At 6,229 cc (8 cylinders), 1963 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1963 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud weights approximately 348 kg more than 2004 Ford Thunderbird.
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:
| 2004 Ford Thunderbird | 1963 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud | |
| Make | Ford | Rolls-Royce |
| Model | Thunderbird | Silver Cloud |
| Year Released | 2004 | 1963 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3932 cc | 6229 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 280 HP | 0 HP |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1752 kg | 2100 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4740 mm | 5380 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1840 mm | 1890 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1330 mm | 1630 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2730 mm | 3130 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 12.4 L/100km | 15.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 81 L |
