1956 Austin A 40 vs. 2002 Mitsubishi Dingo
To start off, 2002 Mitsubishi Dingo is newer by 46 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 1,489 cc (4 cylinders), 1956 Austin A 40 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2002 Mitsubishi Dingo weights approximately 120 kg more than 1956 Austin A 40.
Because 2002 Mitsubishi Dingo is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1956 Austin A 40. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2002 Mitsubishi Dingo will offer significantly more control. 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. 2002 Mitsubishi Dingo has automatic transmission and 1956 Austin A 40 has manual transmission. 1956 Austin A 40 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2002 Mitsubishi Dingo will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 1956 Austin A 40 | 2002 Mitsubishi Dingo | |
| Make | Austin | Mitsubishi |
| Model | A 40 | Dingo |
| Year Released | 1956 | 2002 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1489 cc | 1300 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 49 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 3 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1050 kg | 1170 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4130 mm | 3900 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1570 mm | 1710 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1570 mm | 1650 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2530 mm | 2450 mm |
