2009 Ford E-250 vs. 1969 Ford Thunderbird
To start off, 2009 Ford E-250 is newer by 40 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1969 Ford Thunderbird. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1969 Ford Thunderbird would be higher. At 7,029 cc (8 cylinders), 1969 Ford Thunderbird is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1969 Ford Thunderbird (355 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 130 more horse power than 2009 Ford E-250. (225 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1969 Ford Thunderbird should accelerate faster than 2009 Ford E-250.
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, 2009 Ford E-250 (388 Nm @ 3500 RPM) has 88 more torque (in Nm) than 1969 Ford Thunderbird. (300 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2009 Ford E-250 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1969 Ford Thunderbird.
Compare all specifications:
2009 Ford E-250 | 1969 Ford Thunderbird | |
Make | Ford | Ford |
Model | E-250 | Thunderbird |
Year Released | 2009 | 1969 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4606 cc | 7029 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Horse Power | 225 HP | 355 HP |
Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Torque | 388 Nm | 300 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3500 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 2 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Wheelbase Size | 3510 mm | 2900 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 12.4 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 15.7 L/100km | 29.4 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 132 L | 91 L |