1952 Austin-Healey Tickford vs. 2010 Honda Civic
To start off, 2010 Honda Civic is newer by 58 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, 2010 Honda Civic (140 HP @ 6300 RPM) has 35 more horse power than 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford. (105 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Honda Civic should accelerate faster than 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford weights approximately 337 kg more than 2010 Honda Civic.
Let's talk about torque, 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford (184 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 11 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Honda Civic. (173 Nm @ 4300 RPM). This means 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Honda Civic.
Compare all specifications:
| 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford | 2010 Honda Civic | |
| Make | Austin-Healey | Honda |
| Model | Tickford | Civic |
| Year Released | 1952 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2441 cc | 1800 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 105 HP | 140 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 6300 RPM |
| Torque | 184 Nm | 173 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 4300 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Vehicle Weight | 1530 kg | 1193 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 4503 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1753 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1435 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 2700 mm |
