1946 Austin 16 vs. 1982 Zastava 1500
To start off, 1982 Zastava 1500 is newer by 36 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1946 Austin 16. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1946 Austin 16 would be higher. At 2,200 cc (4 cylinders), 1946 Austin 16 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1982 Zastava 1500 (74 HP @ 5400 RPM) has 11 more horse power than 1946 Austin 16. (63 HP @ 3800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1982 Zastava 1500 should accelerate faster than 1946 Austin 16. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1946 Austin 16 weights approximately 320 kg more than 1982 Zastava 1500.
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, 1946 Austin 16 (146 Nm @ 2200 RPM) has 33 more torque (in Nm) than 1982 Zastava 1500. (113 Nm @ 3200 RPM). This means 1946 Austin 16 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1982 Zastava 1500.
Compare all specifications:
| 1946 Austin 16 | 1982 Zastava 1500 | |
| Make | Austin | Zastava |
| Model | 16 | 1500 |
| Year Released | 1946 | 1982 |
| Engine Size | 2200 cc | 1481 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 63 HP | 74 HP |
| Engine RPM | 3800 RPM | 5400 RPM |
| Torque | 146 Nm | 113 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2200 RPM | 3200 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 1280 kg | 960 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4350 mm | 4040 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1550 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1690 mm | 1450 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2660 mm | 2430 mm |
