1961 Austin A 40 vs. 2000 Eagle Vision
To start off, 2000 Eagle Vision is newer by 39 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1961 Austin A 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1961 Austin A 40 would be higher. At 2,700 cc (6 cylinders), 2000 Eagle Vision is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Eagle Vision (197 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 161 more horse power than 1961 Austin A 40. (36 HP @ 5000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2000 Eagle Vision should accelerate faster than 1961 Austin A 40. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Eagle Vision weights approximately 810 kg more than 1961 Austin A 40. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 1961 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 1961 Austin A 40. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Eagle Vision, 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:
1961 Austin A 40 | 2000 Eagle Vision | |
Make | Austin | Eagle |
Model | A 40 | Vision |
Year Released | 1961 | 2000 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 948 cc | 2700 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 36 HP | 197 HP |
Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 760 kg | 1570 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3670 mm | 5320 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1520 mm | 1910 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1430 mm |