1953 Austin A 40 vs. 2005 Chevrolet Tracker
To start off, 2005 Chevrolet Tracker is newer by 52 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1953 Austin A 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1953 Austin A 40 would be higher. At 1,590 cc (4 cylinders), 2005 Chevrolet Tracker is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Chevrolet Tracker (98 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 57 more horse power than 1953 Austin A 40. (41 HP @ 4300 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2005 Chevrolet Tracker should accelerate faster than 1953 Austin A 40.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2005 Chevrolet Tracker (139 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 55 more torque (in Nm) than 1953 Austin A 40. (84 Nm @ 2200 RPM). This means 2005 Chevrolet Tracker will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1953 Austin A 40.
Compare all specifications:
| 1953 Austin A 40 | 2005 Chevrolet Tracker | |
| Make | Austin | Chevrolet |
| Model | A 40 | Tracker |
| Year Released | 1953 | 2005 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1200 cc | 1590 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 41 HP | 98 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4300 RPM | 5200 RPM |
| Torque | 84 Nm | 139 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2200 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 4060 mm | 3860 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1610 mm | 1720 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1630 mm | 1700 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2360 mm | 2210 mm |
