1950 Austin A 40 vs. 1970 Mazda RX-2
To start off, 1970 Mazda RX-2 is newer by 20 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1950 Austin A 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1950 Austin A 40 would be higher. At 2,292 cc, 1970 Mazda RX-2 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1970 Mazda RX-2 (118 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 80 more horse power than 1950 Austin A 40. (38 HP @ 4300 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1970 Mazda RX-2 should accelerate faster than 1950 Austin A 40. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1950 Austin A 40 weights approximately 10 kg more than 1970 Mazda RX-2.
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, 1970 Mazda RX-2 (157 Nm @ 3500 RPM) has 77 more torque (in Nm) than 1950 Austin A 40. (80 Nm @ 2300 RPM). This means 1970 Mazda RX-2 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1950 Austin A 40.
Compare all specifications:
| 1950 Austin A 40 | 1970 Mazda RX-2 | |
| Make | Austin | Mazda |
| Model | A 40 | RX-2 |
| Year Released | 1950 | 1970 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1200 cc | 2292 cc |
| Engine Type | in-line | dual-disk rotary |
| Horse Power | 38 HP | 118 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4300 RPM | 6500 RPM |
| Torque | 80 Nm | 157 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2300 RPM | 3500 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 970 kg | 960 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3890 mm | 4150 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1560 mm | 1580 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1620 mm | 1420 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2360 mm | 2480 mm |
