1952 Austin A 40 vs. 2009 Mazda BT-50
To start off, 2009 Mazda BT-50 is newer by 57 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 2,953 cc (4 cylinders), 2009 Mazda BT-50 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Mazda BT-50 (154 HP @ 3200 RPM) has 116 more horse power than 1952 Austin A 40. (38 HP @ 4300 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mazda BT-50 should accelerate faster than 1952 Austin A 40.
Because 2009 Mazda BT-50 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1952 Austin A 40. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 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, 2009 Mazda BT-50 (380 Nm @ 180 RPM) has 300 more torque (in Nm) than 1952 Austin A 40. (80 Nm @ 2300 RPM). This means 2009 Mazda BT-50 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 | 2009 Mazda BT-50 | |
Make | Austin | Mazda |
Model | A 40 | BT-50 |
Year Released | 1952 | 2009 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1200 cc | 2953 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 38 HP | 154 HP |
Engine RPM | 4300 RPM | 3200 RPM |
Torque | 80 Nm | 380 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2300 RPM | 180 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 65.5 mm | 96.1 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 89 mm | 102 mm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Height | 1620 mm | 1810 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2360 mm | 3010 mm |