1952 Austin A 40 vs. 1969 Nissan Bluebird
To start off, 1969 Nissan Bluebird is newer by 17 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1952 Austin A 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1952 Austin A 40 would be higher. At 1,296 cc (4 cylinders), 1969 Nissan Bluebird is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1969 Nissan Bluebird (62 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 24 more horse power than 1952 Austin A 40. (38 HP @ 4300 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1969 Nissan Bluebird should accelerate faster than 1952 Austin A 40. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1952 Austin A 40 weights approximately 67 kg more than 1969 Nissan Bluebird.
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, 1969 Nissan Bluebird (103 Nm @ 3600 RPM) has 23 more torque (in Nm) than 1952 Austin A 40. (80 Nm @ 2300 RPM). This means 1969 Nissan Bluebird will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1952 Austin A 40.
Compare all specifications:
1952 Austin A 40 | 1969 Nissan Bluebird | |
Make | Austin | Nissan |
Model | A 40 | Bluebird |
Year Released | 1952 | 1969 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1200 cc | 1296 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 38 HP | 62 HP |
Engine RPM | 4300 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 80 Nm | 103 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2300 RPM | 3600 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Vehicle Weight | 972 kg | 905 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3890 mm | 4130 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1560 mm | 1570 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1620 mm | 1410 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2360 mm | 2430 mm |