2004 Holden UTE vs. 1950 Holden FX
To start off, 2004 Holden UTE is newer by 54 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1950 Holden FX. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1950 Holden FX would be higher. At 3,791 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Holden UTE is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Holden UTE (204 HP) has 153 more horse power than 1950 Holden FX. (51 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Holden UTE should accelerate faster than 1950 Holden FX. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Holden UTE weights approximately 530 kg more than 1950 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, 2004 Holden UTE (305 Nm @ 3600 RPM) has 169 more torque (in Nm) than 1950 Holden FX. (136 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 2004 Holden UTE will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1950 Holden FX.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Holden UTE | 1950 Holden FX | |
Make | Holden | Holden |
Model | UTE | FX |
Year Released | 2004 | 1950 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3791 cc | 2165 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 204 HP | 51 HP |
Torque | 305 Nm | 136 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3600 RPM | 2000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Vehicle Weight | 1500 kg | 970 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5060 mm | 4380 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1710 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1490 mm | 1580 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2950 mm | 2620 mm |