1952 Austin A 40 vs. 2002 BMW M3
To start off, 2002 BMW M3 is newer by 50 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 3,997 cc (8 cylinders), 2002 BMW M3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 BMW M3 (444 HP @ 7400 RPM) has 395 more horse power than 1952 Austin A 40. (49 HP @ 5000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2002 BMW M3 should accelerate faster than 1952 Austin A 40. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2002 BMW M3 weights approximately 110 kg more than 1952 Austin A 40. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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, 2002 BMW M3 (480 Nm) has 397 more torque (in Nm) than 1952 Austin A 40. (83 Nm). This means 2002 BMW M3 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 | 2002 BMW M3 | |
| Make | Austin | BMW |
| Model | A 40 | M3 |
| Year Released | 1952 | 2002 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1200 cc | 3997 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 49 HP | 444 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 7400 RPM |
| Torque | 83 Nm | 480 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 990 kg | 1100 kg |
| Wheelbase Size | 2360 mm | 2890 mm |
