2005 Ford Falcon vs. 1963 Volvo 120
To start off, 2005 Ford Falcon is newer by 42 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Volvo 120. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Volvo 120 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 133 more horse power than 1963 Volvo 120. (67 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2005 Ford Falcon should accelerate faster than 1963 Volvo 120. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Ford Falcon weights approximately 571 kg more than 1963 Volvo 120. 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 213 more torque (in Nm) than 1963 Volvo 120. (144 Nm @ 2300 RPM). This means 2005 Ford Falcon will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1963 Volvo 120.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Ford Falcon | 1963 Volvo 120 | |
Make | Ford | Volvo |
Model | Falcon | 120 |
Year Released | 2005 | 1963 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3984 cc | 1778 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 200 HP | 67 HP |
Torque | 357 Nm | 144 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 2300 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1581 kg | 1010 kg |
Wheelbase Size | 2930 mm | 2610 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 70 L | 58 L |