1952 Austin A vs. 2010 Kia Cadenza
To start off, 2010 Kia Cadenza 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 Kia Cadenza (294 HP) has 170 more horse power than 1952 Austin A. (124 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Kia Cadenza should accelerate faster than 1952 Austin A. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1952 Austin A weights approximately 400 kg more than 2010 Kia Cadenza.
Because 1952 Austin A 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. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Kia Cadenza, 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.
Compare all specifications:
1952 Austin A | 2010 Kia Cadenza | |
Make | Austin | Kia |
Model | A | Cadenza |
Year Released | 1952 | 2010 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3992 cc | 3300 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 124 HP | 294 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1975 kg | 1575 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4880 mm | 4965 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1850 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1710 mm | 1475 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3040 mm | 2845 mm |