2005 Ford Econoline vs. 1964 Ford Falcon
To start off, 2005 Ford Econoline is newer by 41 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Ford Falcon. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Ford Falcon would be higher. At 4,195 cc (6 cylinders), 2005 Ford Econoline is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1964 Ford Falcon (282 HP @ 4400 RPM) has 85 more horse power than 2005 Ford Econoline. (197 HP @ 4700 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1964 Ford Falcon should accelerate faster than 2005 Ford Econoline. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Ford Econoline weights approximately 1625 kg more than 1964 Ford Falcon.
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, 2005 Ford Econoline (338 Nm @ 2700 RPM) has 94 more torque (in Nm) than 1964 Ford Falcon. (244 Nm @ 2800 RPM). This means 2005 Ford Econoline will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1964 Ford Falcon.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Ford Econoline | 1964 Ford Falcon | |
| Make | Ford | Ford |
| Model | Econoline | Falcon |
| Year Released | 2005 | 1964 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4195 cc | 2890 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 197 HP | 282 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4700 RPM | 4400 RPM |
| Torque | 338 Nm | 244 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2700 RPM | 2800 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 2325 kg | 700 kg |
