2005 Chevrolet Equinox vs. 2012 Ford Falcon
To start off, 2012 Ford Falcon is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Chevrolet Equinox. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Chevrolet Equinox would be higher. At 3,425 cc (6 cylinders), 2005 Chevrolet Equinox is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Ford Falcon (240 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 55 more horse power than 2005 Chevrolet Equinox. (185 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Ford Falcon should accelerate faster than 2005 Chevrolet Equinox. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Chevrolet Equinox weights approximately 12 kg more than 2012 Ford Falcon.
Because 2012 Ford Falcon 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 2012 Ford Falcon. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 Chevrolet Equinox, 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. Let's talk about torque, 2012 Ford Falcon (353 Nm) has 68 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Chevrolet Equinox. (285 Nm). This means 2012 Ford Falcon will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Chevrolet Equinox.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Chevrolet Equinox | 2012 Ford Falcon | |
Make | Chevrolet | Ford |
Model | Equinox | Falcon |
Year Released | 2005 | 2012 |
Body Type | SUV | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3425 cc | 1999 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 185 HP | 240 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5500 RPM |
Torque | 285 Nm | 353 Nm |
Engine Bore Size | 92.1 mm | 87.5 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 84 mm | 83.1 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 9.5:1 | 9.3:1 |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1660 kg | 1648 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4800 mm | 4967 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1820 mm | 1868 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1770 mm | 1433 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2860 mm | 2838 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.4 L/100km | 6.4 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 12.4 L/100km | 12.2 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.2 L/100km | 8.5 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 68 L |