2005 Ford Falcon vs. 1963 Reliant Sabre Six

To start off, 2005 Ford Falcon is newer by 42 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Reliant Sabre Six. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Reliant Sabre Six 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) has 92 more horse power than 1963 Reliant Sabre Six. (108 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2005 Ford Falcon should accelerate faster than 1963 Reliant Sabre Six. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Ford Falcon weights approximately 783 kg more than 1963 Reliant Sabre Six. 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, 2005 Ford Falcon (357 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 172 more torque (in Nm) than 1963 Reliant Sabre Six. (185 Nm @ 2400 RPM). This means 2005 Ford Falcon will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1963 Reliant Sabre Six.

Compare all specifications:

2005 Ford Falcon 1963 Reliant Sabre Six
Make Ford Reliant
Model Falcon Sabre Six
Year Released 2005 1963
Engine Position Front Front
Engine Size 3984 cc 2553 cc
Engine Cylinders 6 cylinders 6 cylinders
Engine Type in-line in-line
Horse Power 200 HP 108 HP
Torque 357 Nm 185 Nm
Torque RPM 3000 RPM 2400 RPM
Engine Bore Size 92.4 mm 82.6 mm
Drive Type Rear Rear
Number of Doors 4 doors 2 doors
Vehicle Weight 1581 kg 798 kg
Wheelbase Size 2930 mm 2290 mm
Fuel Tank Capacity 70 L 38 L