2009 Ford Flex vs. 1980 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow
To start off, 2009 Ford Flex is newer by 29 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1980 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1980 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow would be higher. At 6,749 cc (8 cylinders), 1980 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1980 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow weights approximately 1240 kg more than 2009 Ford Flex.
Because 1980 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow 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 1980 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Ford Flex, 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Ford Flex | 1980 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow | |
| Make | Ford | Rolls-Royce |
| Model | Flex | Silver Shadow |
| Year Released | 2009 | 1980 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3496 cc | 6749 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 262 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 7 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 966 kg | 2206 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5130 mm | 5280 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1930 mm | 1810 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1730 mm | 1520 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3000 mm | 3040 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 12.5 L/100km | 15.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 70 L | 107 L |
