2005 Ford Falcon vs. 1960 Mini MK I

To start off, 2005 Ford Falcon is newer by 45 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1960 Mini MK I. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1960 Mini MK I would be higher. At 3,984 cc (6 cylinders), 2005 Ford Falcon is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Ford Falcon (200 HP @ 4900 RPM) has 166 more horse power than 1960 Mini MK I. (34 HP @ 5500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2005 Ford Falcon should accelerate faster than 1960 Mini MK I. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Ford Falcon weights approximately 966 kg more than 1960 Mini MK I. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.

Because 2005 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 2005 Ford Falcon. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1960 Mini MK I, 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, 2005 Ford Falcon (357 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 297 more torque (in Nm) than 1960 Mini MK I. (60 Nm @ 2900 RPM). This means 2005 Ford Falcon will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1960 Mini MK I. 2005 Ford Falcon has automatic transmission and 1960 Mini MK I has manual transmission. 1960 Mini MK I will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2005 Ford Falcon will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.

Compare all specifications: