1960 Austin A 40 vs. 2012 Mercedes-Benz C
To start off, 2012 Mercedes-Benz C is newer by 52 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1960 Austin A 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1960 Austin A 40 would be higher. At 2,143 cc (4 cylinders), 2012 Mercedes-Benz C is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Mercedes-Benz C (136 HP @ 2800 RPM) has 102 more horse power than 1960 Austin A 40. (34 HP @ 4750 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Mercedes-Benz C should accelerate faster than 1960 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, 2012 Mercedes-Benz C (360 Nm @ 1600 RPM) has 292 more torque (in Nm) than 1960 Austin A 40. (68 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 2012 Mercedes-Benz C will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1960 Austin A 40.
Compare all specifications:
1960 Austin A 40 | 2012 Mercedes-Benz C | |
Make | Austin | Mercedes-Benz |
Model | A 40 | C |
Year Released | 1960 | 2012 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 997 cc | 2143 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 34 HP | 136 HP |
Engine RPM | 4750 RPM | 2800 RPM |
Torque | 68 Nm | 360 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 1600 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 8.3:1 | 16.2:1 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 3670 mm | 4606 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1520 mm | 1770 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1459 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2130 mm | 2760 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 26 L | 66 L |