1950 Austin A 40 vs. 1982 Bristol Brigand
To start off, 1982 Bristol Brigand is newer by 32 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 5,898 cc (8 cylinders), 1982 Bristol Brigand is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1982 Bristol Brigand weights approximately 792 kg more than 1950 Austin A 40.
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:
| 1950 Austin A 40 | 1982 Bristol Brigand | |
| Make | Austin | Bristol |
| Model | A 40 | Brigand |
| Year Released | 1950 | 1982 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1200 cc | 5898 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 49 HP | 0 HP |
| Engine Bore Size | 65.5 mm | 101.6 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 89 mm | 90.9 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 7.2:1 | 8.0:1 |
| Top Speed | 127 km/hour | 241 km/hour |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 966 kg | 1758 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4060 mm | 5010 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1560 mm | 1780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1450 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2360 mm | 2910 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 34 L | 82 L |
