1960 Austin A 90 vs. 2000 Mercedes-Benz C
To start off, 2000 Mercedes-Benz C is newer by 40 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1960 Austin A 90. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1960 Austin A 90 would be higher. At 2,912 cc (6 cylinders), 1960 Austin A 90 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Mercedes-Benz C (189 HP @ 5300 RPM) has 87 more horse power than 1960 Austin A 90. (102 HP @ 4500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2000 Mercedes-Benz C should accelerate faster than 1960 Austin A 90.
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, 2000 Mercedes-Benz C (280 Nm @ 2500 RPM) has 66 more torque (in Nm) than 1960 Austin A 90. (214 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 2000 Mercedes-Benz C will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1960 Austin A 90.
Compare all specifications:
1960 Austin A 90 | 2000 Mercedes-Benz C | |
Make | Austin | Mercedes-Benz |
Model | A 90 | C |
Year Released | 1960 | 2000 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2912 cc | 2293 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 102 HP | 189 HP |
Engine RPM | 4500 RPM | 5300 RPM |
Torque | 214 Nm | 280 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 2500 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 7.2:1 | 8.8:1 |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1500 kg | 1500 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4780 mm | 4350 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1750 mm | 1730 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1540 mm | 1410 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2750 mm | 2840 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 72 L | 69 L |