1952 Austin-Healey Tickford vs. 2002 Mitsubishi SUP
To start off, 2002 Mitsubishi SUP is newer by 50 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, 2002 Mitsubishi SUP (163 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 58 more horse power than 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford. (105 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2002 Mitsubishi SUP should accelerate faster than 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2002 Mitsubishi SUP weights approximately 470 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, 2002 Mitsubishi SUP (240 Nm) has 56 more torque (in Nm) than 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford. (184 Nm). This means 2002 Mitsubishi SUP 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 | 2002 Mitsubishi SUP | |
Make | Austin-Healey | Mitsubishi |
Model | Tickford | SUP |
Year Released | 1952 | 2002 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2441 cc | 1999 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 105 HP | 163 HP |
Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Torque | 184 Nm | 240 Nm |
Vehicle Weight | 1530 kg | 2000 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 4170 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1860 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1630 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 2620 mm |