2005 Eagle Vision vs. 1967 Holden HR
To start off, 2005 Eagle Vision is newer by 38 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1967 Holden HR. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1967 Holden HR would be higher. At 3,048 cc (6 cylinders), 1967 Holden HR is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Eagle Vision (197 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 89 more horse power than 1967 Holden HR. (108 HP @ 4200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2005 Eagle Vision should accelerate faster than 1967 Holden HR. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Eagle Vision weights approximately 280 kg more than 1967 Holden HR. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 1967 Holden HR 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 1967 Holden HR. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 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:
| 2005 Eagle Vision | 1967 Holden HR | |
| Make | Eagle | Holden |
| Model | Vision | HR |
| Year Released | 2005 | 1967 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2700 cc | 3048 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 197 HP | 108 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 4200 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Vehicle Weight | 1570 kg | 1290 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5320 mm | 4610 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1910 mm | 1790 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1490 mm |
