1952 Austin A 40 vs. 2005 Citroen C6
To start off, 2005 Citroen C6 is newer by 53 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 2,721 cc (6 cylinders), 2005 Citroen C6 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Citroen C6 (205 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 164 more horse power than 1952 Austin A 40. (41 HP @ 4500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2005 Citroen C6 should accelerate faster than 1952 Austin A 40.
Because 1952 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 1952 Austin A 40. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 Citroen C6, 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, 2005 Citroen C6 (440 Nm @ 1900 RPM) has 361 more torque (in Nm) than 1952 Austin A 40. (79 Nm @ 2400 RPM). This means 2005 Citroen C6 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 | 2005 Citroen C6 | |
| Make | Austin | Citroen |
| Model | A 40 | C6 |
| Year Released | 1952 | 2005 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1199 cc | 2721 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 41 HP | 205 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4500 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Torque | 79 Nm | 440 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2400 RPM | 1900 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 4060 mm | 4920 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1610 mm | 1870 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1590 mm | 1470 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2360 mm | 2910 mm |
