2006 Chevrolet Cobalt vs. 2012 Ford Falcon
To start off, 2012 Ford Falcon is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Chevrolet Cobalt. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Chevrolet Cobalt would be higher. At 3,983 cc (6 cylinders), 2012 Ford Falcon is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Ford Falcon (261 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 116 more horse power than 2006 Chevrolet Cobalt. (145 HP @ 5600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Ford Falcon should accelerate faster than 2006 Chevrolet Cobalt. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Chevrolet Cobalt weights approximately 46 kg more than 2012 Ford Falcon.
Because 2012 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 2012 Ford Falcon. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Chevrolet Cobalt, 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, 2012 Ford Falcon (391 Nm @ 3250 RPM) has 181 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Chevrolet Cobalt. (210 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2012 Ford Falcon will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Chevrolet Cobalt. 2012 Ford Falcon has automatic transmission and 2006 Chevrolet Cobalt has manual transmission. 2006 Chevrolet Cobalt will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2012 Ford Falcon will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Chevrolet Cobalt | 2012 Ford Falcon | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Ford |
| Model | Cobalt | Falcon |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2012 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2196 cc | 3983 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 145 HP | 261 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 210 Nm | 391 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 3250 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 86 mm | 92.3 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 94 mm | 99.3 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 10.3:1 |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1750 kg | 1704 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4590 mm | 4955 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1730 mm | 1868 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1453 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2630 mm | 2838 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 6.9 L/100km | 7.6 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 9.4 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 8.1 L/100km | 9.9 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 49 L | 68 L |
