1956 Austin A 40 vs. 2011 Nissan Micra
To start off, 2011 Nissan Micra is newer by 55 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. Both 1956 Austin A 40 and 2011 Nissan Micra are equipped with a 1,200 cc engine. In terms of performance, 2011 Nissan Micra (79 HP) has 38 more horse power than 1956 Austin A 40. (41 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2011 Nissan Micra should accelerate faster than 1956 Austin A 40.
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, 2011 Nissan Micra, 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. Let's talk about torque, 2011 Nissan Micra (108 Nm) has 29 more torque (in Nm) than 1956 Austin A 40. (79 Nm). This means 2011 Nissan Micra 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 | 2011 Nissan Micra | |
| Make | Austin | Nissan |
| Model | A 40 | Micra |
| Year Released | 1956 | 2011 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1200 cc | 1200 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 41 HP | 79 HP |
| Torque | 79 Nm | 108 Nm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4130 mm | 3780 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1570 mm | 1666 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1570 mm | 1514 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2530 mm | 2449 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 54 L | 46 L |
