1959 Austin A 40 vs. 2009 Nissan Murano
To start off, 2009 Nissan Murano is newer by 50 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 3,498 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Nissan Murano is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Nissan Murano (261 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 227 more horse power than 1959 Austin A 40. (34 HP @ 4750 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Nissan Murano should accelerate faster than 1959 Austin A 40.
Because 1959 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 1959 Austin A 40. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Nissan Murano, 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. Let's talk about torque, 2009 Nissan Murano (248 Nm @ 4400 RPM) has 180 more torque (in Nm) than 1959 Austin A 40. (68 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 2009 Nissan Murano 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 | 2009 Nissan Murano | |
| Make | Austin | Nissan |
| Model | A 40 | Murano |
| Year Released | 1959 | 2009 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 997 cc | 3498 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 34 HP | 261 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4750 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 68 Nm | 248 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 4400 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 8.3:1 | 10.3:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Width | 1520 mm | 1890 mm |
