2005 Ford Ranger vs. 1950 Holden FX
To start off, 2005 Ford Ranger is newer by 55 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1950 Holden FX. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1950 Holden FX would be higher. At 2,165 cc (6 cylinders), 1950 Holden FX is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Ford Ranger (86 HP) has 35 more horse power than 1950 Holden FX. (51 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2005 Ford Ranger should accelerate faster than 1950 Holden FX. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Ford Ranger weights approximately 332 kg more than 1950 Holden FX. 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, 1950 Holden FX (136 Nm @ 2000 RPM) has 1 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Ford Ranger. (135 Nm @ 3500 RPM). This means 1950 Holden FX will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Ford Ranger.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Ford Ranger | 1950 Holden FX | |
| Make | Ford | Holden |
| Model | Ranger | FX |
| Year Released | 2005 | 1950 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1753 cc | 2165 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 86 HP | 51 HP |
| Torque | 135 Nm | 136 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3500 RPM | 2000 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 1302 kg | 970 kg |
| Wheelbase Size | 2990 mm | 2620 mm |
