1956 Austin-Healey Tickford vs. 2000 Daewoo Rezzo
To start off, 2000 Daewoo Rezzo 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, 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford (105 HP @ 4800 RPM) has 8 more horse power than 2000 Daewoo Rezzo. (97 HP @ 5200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford should accelerate faster than 2000 Daewoo Rezzo. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford weights approximately 260 kg more than 2000 Daewoo Rezzo. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford (184 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 35 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Daewoo Rezzo. (149 Nm @ 3600 RPM). This means 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Daewoo Rezzo.
Compare all specifications:
| 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford | 2000 Daewoo Rezzo | |
| Make | Austin-Healey | Daewoo |
| Model | Tickford | Rezzo |
| Year Released | 1956 | 2000 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Minivan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2443 cc | 1761 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 105 HP | 97 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 5200 RPM |
| Torque | 184 Nm | 149 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 3600 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Vehicle Weight | 1530 kg | 1270 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 4360 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1760 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1590 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 2610 mm |
