2009 Ford Mustang vs. 1966 Holden EH
To start off, 2009 Ford Mustang is newer by 43 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Holden EH. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Holden EH would be higher. At 4,600 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Ford Mustang (395 HP @ 5300 RPM) has 295 more horse power than 1966 Holden EH. (100 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 1966 Holden EH.
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 Mustang (240 Nm @ 3500 RPM) has 3 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 Holden EH. (237 Nm @ 1600 RPM). This means 2009 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1966 Holden EH.
Compare all specifications:
2009 Ford Mustang | 1966 Holden EH | |
Make | Ford | Holden |
Model | Mustang | EH |
Year Released | 2009 | 1966 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4600 cc | 2930 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 395 HP | 100 HP |
Engine RPM | 5300 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Torque | 240 Nm | 237 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3500 RPM | 1600 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Vehicle Length | 4780 mm | 4560 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1490 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2740 mm | 2680 mm |