1956 Austin A 40 vs. 1989 Chevrolet Camaro
To start off, 1989 Chevrolet Camaro is newer by 33 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1956 Austin A 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1956 Austin A 40 would be higher. At 2,835 cc (6 cylinders), 1989 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1989 Chevrolet Camaro (134 HP) has 93 more horse power than 1956 Austin A 40. (41 HP) In normal driving conditions, 1989 Chevrolet Camaro should accelerate faster than 1956 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, 1989 Chevrolet Camaro (223 Nm @ 3600 RPM) has 144 more torque (in Nm) than 1956 Austin A 40. (79 Nm @ 2400 RPM). This means 1989 Chevrolet Camaro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1956 Austin A 40.
Compare all specifications:
| 1956 Austin A 40 | 1989 Chevrolet Camaro | |
| Make | Austin | Chevrolet |
| Model | A 40 | Camaro |
| Year Released | 1956 | 1989 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1200 cc | 2835 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 41 HP | 134 HP |
| Torque | 79 Nm | 223 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2400 RPM | 3600 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 65.5 mm | 88.9 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 89 mm | 76.2 mm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4130 mm | 4880 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1570 mm | 1860 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2530 mm | 2580 mm |
