1953 Austin-Healey Tickford vs. 2010 Chevrolet HHR
To start off, 2010 Chevrolet HHR is newer by 57 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1953 Austin-Healey Tickford. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1953 Austin-Healey Tickford would be higher. At 2,443 cc (4 cylinders), 1953 Austin-Healey Tickford is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Chevrolet HHR (260 HP @ 5300 RPM) has 155 more horse power than 1953 Austin-Healey Tickford. (105 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Chevrolet HHR should accelerate faster than 1953 Austin-Healey Tickford. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1953 Austin-Healey Tickford weights approximately 42 kg more than 2010 Chevrolet HHR.
Let's talk about torque, 2010 Chevrolet HHR (352 Nm @ 2000 RPM) has 167 more torque (in Nm) than 1953 Austin-Healey Tickford. (185 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2010 Chevrolet HHR will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1953 Austin-Healey Tickford.
Compare all specifications:
| 1953 Austin-Healey Tickford | 2010 Chevrolet HHR | |
| Make | Austin-Healey | Chevrolet |
| Model | Tickford | HHR |
| Year Released | 1953 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2443 cc | 2000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 105 HP | 260 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 5300 RPM |
| Torque | 185 Nm | 352 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 2000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Vehicle Weight | 1530 kg | 1488 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 4483 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1755 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1588 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 2629 mm |
