1960 Austin A 99 vs. 2010 Ford Fusion
To start off, 2010 Ford Fusion is newer by 50 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. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2010 Ford Fusion weights approximately 157 kg more than 1960 Austin A 99.
Because 1960 Austin A 99 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 1960 Austin A 99. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Ford Fusion, 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.
Compare all specifications:
1960 Austin A 99 | 2010 Ford Fusion | |
Make | Austin | Ford |
Model | A 99 | Fusion |
Year Released | 1960 | 2010 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2910 cc | 2500 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 106 HP | 0 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline / Electric Hybrid |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | CVT |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1530 kg | 1687 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4950 mm | 4841 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1750 mm | 1834 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1540 mm | 1445 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2800 mm | 2728 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 34 L | 64 L |