1956 Austin A 40 vs. 2009 Mazda RX-8
To start off, 2009 Mazda RX-8 is newer by 53 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. In terms of performance, 2009 Mazda RX-8 (232 HP @ 8500 RPM) has 183 more horse power than 1956 Austin A 40. (49 HP @ 4400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mazda RX-8 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, 2009 Mazda RX-8 (216 Nm @ 5500 RPM) has 116 more torque (in Nm) than 1956 Austin A 40. (100 Nm @ 2100 RPM). This means 2009 Mazda RX-8 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 | 2009 Mazda RX-8 | |
Make | Austin | Mazda |
Model | A 40 | RX-8 |
Year Released | 1956 | 2009 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1489 cc | 1306 cc |
Engine Type | in-line | dual-disk rotary |
Horse Power | 49 HP | 232 HP |
Engine RPM | 4400 RPM | 8500 RPM |
Torque | 100 Nm | 216 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2100 RPM | 5500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4130 mm | 4470 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1570 mm | 1780 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1570 mm | 1350 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2530 mm | 2710 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 72 L | 64 L |