1956 Austin A 90 vs. 1980 Zastava 132
To start off, 1980 Zastava 132 is newer by 24 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1956 Austin A 90. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1956 Austin A 90 would be higher. At 2,639 cc (6 cylinders), 1956 Austin A 90 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1980 Zastava 132 (106 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 21 more horse power than 1956 Austin A 90. (85 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1980 Zastava 132 should accelerate faster than 1956 Austin A 90. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1956 Austin A 90 weights approximately 225 kg more than 1980 Zastava 132.
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, 1956 Austin A 90 (168 Nm @ 2000 RPM) has 25 more torque (in Nm) than 1980 Zastava 132. (143 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 1956 Austin A 90 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1980 Zastava 132.
Compare all specifications:
| 1956 Austin A 90 | 1980 Zastava 132 | |
| Make | Austin | Zastava |
| Model | A 90 | 132 |
| Year Released | 1956 | 1980 |
| Engine Size | 2639 cc | 1756 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 85 HP | 106 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 168 Nm | 143 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 1320 kg | 1095 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4350 mm | 4410 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1630 mm | 1650 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1620 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2640 mm | 2560 mm |
