1952 Austin A vs. 2010 Holden Commodore
To start off, 2010 Holden Commodore is newer by 58 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1952 Austin A. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1952 Austin A would be higher. At 3,992 cc (6 cylinders), 1952 Austin A is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Holden Commodore (240 HP) has 116 more horse power than 1952 Austin A. (124 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Holden Commodore should accelerate faster than 1952 Austin A.
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, 1952 Austin A (288 Nm) has 48 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Holden Commodore. (240 Nm). This means 1952 Austin A will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Holden Commodore.
Compare all specifications:
| 1952 Austin A | 2010 Holden Commodore | |
| Make | Austin | Holden |
| Model | A | Commodore |
| Year Released | 1952 | 2010 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3992 cc | 2564 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 124 HP | 240 HP |
| Torque | 288 Nm | 240 Nm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
