1961 Austin A 40 vs. 2000 Lotus M250
To start off, 2000 Lotus M250 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 3,000 cc (6 cylinders), 2000 Lotus M250 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Lotus M250 (176 HP @ 7800 RPM) has 140 more horse power than 1961 Austin A 40. (36 HP @ 5000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2000 Lotus M250 should accelerate faster than 1961 Austin A 40. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1961 Austin A 40 weights approximately 85 kg more than 2000 Lotus M250.
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 Lotus M250 (180 Nm) has 112 more torque (in Nm) than 1961 Austin A 40. (68 Nm). This means 2000 Lotus M250 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1961 Austin A 40.
Compare all specifications:
| 1961 Austin A 40 | 2000 Lotus M250 | |
| Make | Austin | Lotus |
| Model | A 40 | M250 |
| Year Released | 1961 | 2000 |
| Engine Position | Front | Middle |
| Engine Size | 948 cc | 3000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 36 HP | 176 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 7800 RPM |
| Torque | 68 Nm | 180 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 760 kg | 675 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3670 mm | 4150 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1520 mm | 1840 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1120 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2220 mm | 2520 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 45 L | 72 L |
