1955 Austin A 55 vs. 2004 MCC Crossblade
To start off, 2004 MCC Crossblade is newer by 49 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1955 Austin A 55. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1955 Austin A 55 would be higher. At 1,489 cc (4 cylinders), 1955 Austin A 55 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 MCC Crossblade (70 HP) has 19 more horse power than 1955 Austin A 55. (51 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2004 MCC Crossblade should accelerate faster than 1955 Austin A 55. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1955 Austin A 55 weights approximately 315 kg more than 2004 MCC Crossblade.
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, 1955 Austin A 55 (110 Nm @ 2000 RPM) has 8 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 MCC Crossblade. (102 Nm @ 3210 RPM). This means 1955 Austin A 55 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 MCC Crossblade.
Compare all specifications:
| 1955 Austin A 55 | 2004 MCC Crossblade | |
| Make | Austin | MCC |
| Model | A 55 | Crossblade |
| Year Released | 1955 | 2004 |
| Engine Size | 1489 cc | 599 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 51 HP | 70 HP |
| Torque | 110 Nm | 102 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 3210 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 1055 kg | 740 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4250 mm | 2630 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1570 mm | 1630 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1570 mm | 1520 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2530 mm | 1810 mm |
