1956 Austin A 95 vs. 2010 Nissan X-Trail
To start off, 2010 Nissan X-Trail is newer by 54 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1956 Austin A 95. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1956 Austin A 95 would be higher. At 2,639 cc (6 cylinders), 1956 Austin A 95 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Nissan X-Trail (148 HP) has 56 more horse power than 1956 Austin A 95. (92 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Nissan X-Trail should accelerate faster than 1956 Austin A 95.
Because 2010 Nissan X-Trail is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1956 Austin A 95. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Nissan X-Trail 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.
Compare all specifications:
1956 Austin A 95 | 2010 Nissan X-Trail | |
Make | Austin | Nissan |
Model | A 95 | X-Trail |
Year Released | 1956 | 2010 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2639 cc | 1995 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 92 HP | 148 HP |
Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4600 mm | 4640 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1630 mm | 1790 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1580 mm | 1690 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2690 mm | 2640 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 72 L | 65 L |