1952 Austin-Healey Tickford vs. 1999 Mazda 626
To start off, 1999 Mazda 626 is newer by 47 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 2,441 cc (4 cylinders), 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford (105 HP @ 4800 RPM) has 5 more horse power than 1999 Mazda 626. (100 HP @ 5500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford should accelerate faster than 1999 Mazda 626. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford weights approximately 290 kg more than 1999 Mazda 626. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford (184 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 32 more torque (in Nm) than 1999 Mazda 626. (152 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1999 Mazda 626.
Compare all specifications:
1952 Austin-Healey Tickford | 1999 Mazda 626 | |
Make | Austin-Healey | Mazda |
Model | Tickford | 626 |
Year Released | 1952 | 1999 |
Body Type | Sedan | Station Wagon |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2441 cc | 1839 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 105 HP | 100 HP |
Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 5500 RPM |
Torque | 184 Nm | 152 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Vehicle Weight | 1530 kg | 1240 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 4680 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1720 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1520 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 2680 mm |