1960 Austin A 99 vs. 1981 Zastava 132
To start off, 1981 Zastava 132 is newer by 21 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1960 Austin A 99. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1960 Austin A 99 would be higher. At 2,910 cc (6 cylinders), 1960 Austin A 99 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, both vehicles can yield 106 horse power. So under normal driving conditions, the acceleration of both vehicles should be relatively similar. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1960 Austin A 99 weights approximately 435 kg more than 1981 Zastava 132.
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, 1960 Austin A 99 (224 Nm @ 2500 RPM) has 82 more torque (in Nm) than 1981 Zastava 132. (142 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 1960 Austin A 99 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1981 Zastava 132.
Compare all specifications:
| 1960 Austin A 99 | 1981 Zastava 132 | |
| Make | Austin | Zastava |
| Model | A 99 | 132 |
| Year Released | 1960 | 1981 |
| Engine Size | 2910 cc | 1756 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 106 HP | 106 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4750 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 224 Nm | 142 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2500 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 1530 kg | 1095 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4950 mm | 4410 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1750 mm | 1650 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1540 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2800 mm | 2560 mm |
