2009 Ford F-350 vs. 1967 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow
To start off, 2009 Ford F-350 is newer by 42 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1967 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1967 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow would be higher. At 6,230 cc (8 cylinders), 1967 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1967 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow weights approximately 1140 kg more than 2009 Ford F-350.
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 Ford F-350 | 1967 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow | |
| Make | Ford | Rolls-Royce |
| Model | F-350 | Silver Shadow |
| Year Released | 2009 | 1967 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5398 cc | 6230 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 300 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 966 kg | 2106 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5890 mm | 5180 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2040 mm | 1810 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1950 mm | 1530 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3610 mm | 3040 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 6.7 L/100km | 15.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 115 L | 109 L |
