1951 Austin A 40 vs. 1989 Matra-Simca M25
To start off, 1989 Matra-Simca M25 is newer by 38 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1951 Austin A 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1951 Austin A 40 would be higher. At 1,764 cc (4 cylinders), 1989 Matra-Simca M25 is equipped with a bigger engine.
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, 1989 Matra-Simca M25 (363 Nm) has 280 more torque (in Nm) than 1951 Austin A 40. (83 Nm). This means 1989 Matra-Simca M25 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1951 Austin A 40.
Compare all specifications:
| 1951 Austin A 40 | 1989 Matra-Simca M25 | |
| Make | Austin | Matra-Simca |
| Model | A 40 | M25 |
| Year Released | 1951 | 1989 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1200 cc | 1764 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 49 HP | 0 HP |
| Torque | 83 Nm | 363 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 2 seats |
