1950 Austin A 40 vs. 2002 Jeep Wrangler
To start off, 2002 Jeep Wrangler is newer by 52 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 3,960 cc (6 cylinders), 2002 Jeep Wrangler is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 Jeep Wrangler (141 HP @ 3800 RPM) has 92 more horse power than 1950 Austin A 40. (49 HP @ 5000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2002 Jeep Wrangler should accelerate faster than 1950 Austin A 40.
Because 1950 Austin A 40 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 1950 Austin A 40. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2002 Jeep Wrangler, 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. Let's talk about torque, 2002 Jeep Wrangler (319 Nm) has 236 more torque (in Nm) than 1950 Austin A 40. (83 Nm). This means 2002 Jeep Wrangler 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 | 2002 Jeep Wrangler | |
Make | Austin | Jeep |
Model | A 40 | Wrangler |
Year Released | 1950 | 2002 |
Body Type | Convertible | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1198 cc | 3960 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 49 HP | 141 HP |
Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 3800 RPM |
Torque | 83 Nm | 319 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Vehicle Length | 4060 mm | 3950 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1560 mm | 1700 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1810 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2360 mm | 2380 mm |