2005 Ford Falcon vs. 1972 Rover 3.5
To start off, 2005 Ford Falcon is newer by 33 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1972 Rover 3.5. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1972 Rover 3.5 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 50 more horse power than 1972 Rover 3.5. (150 HP @ 5000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2005 Ford Falcon should accelerate faster than 1972 Rover 3.5. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1972 Rover 3.5 weights approximately 54 kg more than 2005 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 Falcon (357 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 81 more torque (in Nm) than 1972 Rover 3.5. (276 Nm @ 2600 RPM). This means 2005 Ford Falcon will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1972 Rover 3.5.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Ford Falcon | 1972 Rover 3.5 | |
Make | Ford | Rover |
Model | Falcon | 3.5 |
Year Released | 2005 | 1972 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3984 cc | 3532 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 200 HP | 150 HP |
Engine RPM | 4900 RPM | 5000 RPM |
Torque | 357 Nm | 276 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 2600 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 92.4 mm | 88.9 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 99.3 mm | 71.1 mm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1581 kg | 1635 kg |
Wheelbase Size | 2930 mm | 2820 mm |