1956 Austin-Healey Tickford vs. 2000 Citroen Xsara
To start off, 2000 Citroen Xsara is newer by 44 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford would be higher. At 2,443 cc (4 cylinders), 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Citroen Xsara (165 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 60 more horse power than 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford. (105 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2000 Citroen Xsara should accelerate faster than 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford weights approximately 330 kg more than 2000 Citroen Xsara.
Let's talk about torque, 2000 Citroen Xsara (193 Nm @ 5500 RPM) has 9 more torque (in Nm) than 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford. (184 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2000 Citroen Xsara will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford.
Compare all specifications:
| 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford | 2000 Citroen Xsara | |
| Make | Austin-Healey | Citroen |
| Model | Tickford | Xsara |
| Year Released | 1956 | 2000 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2443 cc | 1998 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 105 HP | 165 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 6500 RPM |
| Torque | 184 Nm | 193 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Vehicle Weight | 1530 kg | 1200 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 4190 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1710 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1410 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 2550 mm |
