1954 Austin-Healey Tickford vs. 2002 Mazda 2
To start off, 2002 Mazda 2 is newer by 48 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1954 Austin-Healey Tickford. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1954 Austin-Healey Tickford would be higher. At 2,443 cc (4 cylinders), 1954 Austin-Healey Tickford is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1954 Austin-Healey Tickford (105 HP @ 4800 RPM) has 39 more horse power than 2002 Mazda 2. (66 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1954 Austin-Healey Tickford should accelerate faster than 2002 Mazda 2. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1954 Austin-Healey Tickford weights approximately 370 kg more than 2002 Mazda 2. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 1954 Austin-Healey Tickford (184 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 24 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 Mazda 2. (160 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 1954 Austin-Healey Tickford will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 Mazda 2.
Compare all specifications:
1954 Austin-Healey Tickford | 2002 Mazda 2 | |
Make | Austin-Healey | Mazda |
Model | Tickford | 2 |
Year Released | 1954 | 2002 |
Engine Size | 2443 cc | 1399 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 105 HP | 66 HP |
Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Torque | 184 Nm | 160 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 2000 RPM |
Vehicle Weight | 1530 kg | 1160 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 3930 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1690 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1550 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 2500 mm |