1956 Austin-Healey Tickford vs. 2009 Mazda CX-7
To start off, 2009 Mazda CX-7 is newer by 53 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, 2009 Mazda CX-7 (244 HP @ 5000 RPM) has 139 more horse power than 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford. (105 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mazda CX-7 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 350 kg more than 2009 Mazda CX-7.
Let's talk about torque, 2009 Mazda CX-7 (350 Nm @ 2500 RPM) has 166 more torque (in Nm) than 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford. (184 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2009 Mazda CX-7 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 | 2009 Mazda CX-7 | |
| Make | Austin-Healey | Mazda |
| Model | Tickford | CX-7 |
| Year Released | 1956 | 2009 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2443 cc | 2258 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 105 HP | 244 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 5000 RPM |
| Torque | 184 Nm | 350 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 2500 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Vehicle Weight | 1530 kg | 1180 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 4680 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1880 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1650 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 2760 mm |
