1956 Austin A 40 vs. 1992 Chrysler Le Baron
To start off, 1992 Chrysler Le Baron is newer by 36 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 2,501 cc (4 cylinders), 1992 Chrysler Le Baron is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 1956 Austin A 40 is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 1956 Austin A 40. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1992 Chrysler Le Baron, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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:
| 1956 Austin A 40 | 1992 Chrysler Le Baron | |
| Make | Austin | Chrysler |
| Model | A 40 | Le Baron |
| Year Released | 1956 | 1992 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1200 cc | 2501 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 41 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4130 mm | 4700 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1570 mm | 1740 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1570 mm | 1360 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2530 mm | 2560 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 54 L | 100 L |
