1958 Austin A 40 vs. 1980 Mitsubishi Colt
To start off, 1980 Mitsubishi Colt is newer by 22 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1958 Austin A 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1958 Austin A 40 would be higher. At 1,242 cc (4 cylinders), 1980 Mitsubishi Colt is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1980 Mitsubishi Colt weights approximately 49 kg more than 1958 Austin A 40.
Because 1958 Austin A 40 is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 1958 Austin A 40. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1980 Mitsubishi Colt, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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:
1958 Austin A 40 | 1980 Mitsubishi Colt | |
Make | Austin | Mitsubishi |
Model | A 40 | Colt |
Year Released | 1958 | 1980 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 948 cc | 1242 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 35 HP | 0 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Vehicle Weight | 761 kg | 810 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3670 mm | 3800 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1520 mm | 1590 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1360 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2130 mm | 2310 mm |