1959 Austin A 40 vs. 1999 Ford Mustang
To start off, 1999 Ford Mustang is newer by 40 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1959 Austin A 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1959 Austin A 40 would be higher. At 1,753 cc (8 cylinders), 1999 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1999 Ford Mustang weights approximately 448 kg more than 1959 Austin A 40.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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. Let's talk about torque, 1999 Ford Mustang (160 Nm) has 92 more torque (in Nm) than 1959 Austin A 40. (68 Nm). This means 1999 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1959 Austin A 40.
Compare all specifications:
1959 Austin A 40 | 1999 Ford Mustang | |
Make | Austin | Ford |
Model | A 40 | Mustang |
Year Released | 1959 | 1999 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 997 cc | 1753 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 34 HP | 0 HP |
Engine RPM | 4750 RPM | 5750 RPM |
Torque | 68 Nm | 160 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 760 kg | 1208 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3670 mm | 4620 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1520 mm | 1830 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1350 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2130 mm | 2540 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 26 L | 68 L |