1954 Austin A 40 vs. 1951 Cadillac 62
To start off, 1954 Austin A 40 is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1951 Cadillac 62. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1951 Cadillac 62 would be higher. At 5,422 cc (8 cylinders), 1951 Cadillac 62 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1951 Cadillac 62 (160 HP @ 3800 RPM) has 119 more horse power than 1954 Austin A 40. (41 HP @ 4500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1951 Cadillac 62 should accelerate faster than 1954 Austin A 40. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1951 Cadillac 62 weights approximately 726 kg more than 1954 Austin A 40. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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.
Compare all specifications:
1954 Austin A 40 | 1951 Cadillac 62 | |
Make | Austin | Cadillac |
Model | A 40 | 62 |
Year Released | 1954 | 1951 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1200 cc | 5422 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 41 HP | 160 HP |
Engine RPM | 4500 RPM | 3800 RPM |
Torque RPM | 2400 RPM | 1800 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 65.5 mm | 96.8 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 89 mm | 92.1 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 7.2:1 | 6.7:1 |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1026 kg | 1752 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4130 mm | 5480 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1570 mm | 2050 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1570 mm | 1600 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2530 mm | 3210 mm |