2009 Dodge Charger vs. 1960 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud
To start off, 2009 Dodge Charger is newer by 49 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1960 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1960 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud would be higher. At 6,230 cc (8 cylinders), 1960 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1960 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud weights approximately 420 kg more than 2009 Dodge Charger.
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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Dodge Charger | 1960 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud | |
| Make | Dodge | Rolls-Royce |
| Model | Charger | Silver Cloud |
| Year Released | 2009 | 1960 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3518 cc | 6230 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 250 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1692 kg | 2112 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5090 mm | 5490 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1900 mm | 1910 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1480 mm | 1630 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3050 mm | 3070 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.8 L/100km | 15.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 81 L |
