1952 Austin-Healey Tickford vs. 2001 Ford F-250
To start off, 2001 Ford F-250 is newer by 49 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 5,407 cc (8 cylinders), 2001 Ford F-250 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2001 Ford F-250 (256 HP @ 4500 RPM) has 151 more horse power than 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford. (105 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2001 Ford F-250 should accelerate faster than 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2001 Ford F-250 weights approximately 820 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, 2001 Ford F-250 (475 Nm @ 2500 RPM) has 291 more torque (in Nm) than 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford. (184 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2001 Ford F-250 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 | 2001 Ford F-250 | |
| Make | Austin-Healey | Ford |
| Model | Tickford | F-250 |
| Year Released | 1952 | 2001 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Pickup |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2441 cc | 5407 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 105 HP | 256 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Torque | 184 Nm | 475 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 2500 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Vehicle Weight | 1530 kg | 2350 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 5760 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 2040 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1940 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 3490 mm |
