1952 Austin-Healey Tickford vs. 1998 Mercedes-Benz ML
To start off, 1998 Mercedes-Benz ML is newer by 46 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford would be higher. At 4,266 cc (8 cylinders), 1998 Mercedes-Benz ML is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1998 Mercedes-Benz ML (275 HP @ 5750 RPM) has 170 more horse power than 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford. (105 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1998 Mercedes-Benz ML should accelerate faster than 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1998 Mercedes-Benz ML weights approximately 465 kg more than 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 1998 Mercedes-Benz ML (391 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 207 more torque (in Nm) than 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford. (184 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 1998 Mercedes-Benz ML will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford.
Compare all specifications:
| 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford | 1998 Mercedes-Benz ML | |
| Make | Austin-Healey | Mercedes-Benz |
| Model | Tickford | ML |
| Year Released | 1952 | 1998 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2441 cc | 4266 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 3 valves |
| Horse Power | 105 HP | 275 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 5750 RPM |
| Torque | 184 Nm | 391 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 3000 RPM |
| Vehicle Weight | 1530 kg | 1995 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 4590 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1840 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1810 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 2850 mm |
