2006 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 1963 Holden EJ
To start off, 2006 Chevrolet Malibu is newer by 43 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Holden EJ. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Holden EJ would be higher. At 3,491 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 Chevrolet Malibu is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Chevrolet Malibu (201 HP @ 5600 RPM) has 137 more horse power than 1963 Holden EJ. (64 HP @ 4200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Chevrolet Malibu should accelerate faster than 1963 Holden EJ.
Because 1963 Holden EJ 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 1963 Holden EJ. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Chevrolet Malibu, 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, 2006 Chevrolet Malibu (300 Nm @ 3200 RPM) has 137 more torque (in Nm) than 1963 Holden EJ. (163 Nm @ 1400 RPM). This means 2006 Chevrolet Malibu will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1963 Holden EJ.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Chevrolet Malibu | 1963 Holden EJ | |
Make | Chevrolet | Holden |
Model | Malibu | EJ |
Year Released | 2006 | 1963 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3491 cc | 2262 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 201 HP | 64 HP |
Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 4200 RPM |
Torque | 300 Nm | 163 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3200 RPM | 1400 RPM |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Vehicle Length | 4790 mm | 4500 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1740 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1480 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2710 mm | 2680 mm |