2006 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 2001 Ford Econoline
To start off, 2006 Chevrolet Malibu is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2001 Ford Econoline. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2001 Ford Econoline would be higher. At 4,194 cc (6 cylinders), 2001 Ford Econoline is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Chevrolet Malibu (240 HP @ 5800 RPM) has 43 more horse power than 2001 Ford Econoline. (197 HP @ 4700 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Chevrolet Malibu should accelerate faster than 2001 Ford Econoline.
Because 2001 Ford Econoline 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 2001 Ford Econoline. 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, 2001 Ford Econoline (338 Nm @ 2700 RPM) has 11 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Chevrolet Malibu. (327 Nm @ 2800 RPM). This means 2001 Ford Econoline will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Chevrolet Malibu.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Chevrolet Malibu | 2001 Ford Econoline | |
Make | Chevrolet | Ford |
Model | Malibu | Econoline |
Year Released | 2006 | 2001 |
Body Type | Sedan | Van |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3900 cc | 4194 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 240 HP | 197 HP |
Engine RPM | 5800 RPM | 4700 RPM |
Torque | 327 Nm | 338 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2800 RPM | 2700 RPM |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Vehicle Length | 4780 mm | 5390 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 2020 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1480 mm | 2060 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2860 mm | 3510 mm |