1952 Austin A 30 vs. 2010 Mazda BT-50
To start off, 2010 Mazda BT-50 is newer by 58 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1952 Austin A 30. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1952 Austin A 30 would be higher. At 2,953 cc (4 cylinders), 2010 Mazda BT-50 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Mazda BT-50 (154 HP @ 3200 RPM) has 125 more horse power than 1952 Austin A 30. (29 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Mazda BT-50 should accelerate faster than 1952 Austin A 30.
Because 2010 Mazda BT-50 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1952 Austin A 30. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Mazda BT-50 will offer significantly more control. 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, 2010 Mazda BT-50 (380 Nm @ 180 RPM) has 326 more torque (in Nm) than 1952 Austin A 30. (54 Nm @ 2200 RPM). This means 2010 Mazda BT-50 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1952 Austin A 30.
Compare all specifications:
1952 Austin A 30 | 2010 Mazda BT-50 | |
Make | Austin | Mazda |
Model | A 30 | BT-50 |
Year Released | 1952 | 2010 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 803 cc | 2953 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 29 HP | 154 HP |
Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 3200 RPM |
Torque | 54 Nm | 380 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2200 RPM | 180 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 58 mm | 96.1 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 76 mm | 102 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 7.2:1 | 18.0:1 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
Number of Doors | 3 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Height | 1490 mm | 1810 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2030 mm | 3010 mm |