1961 Austin A 40 vs. 2000 Plymouth Prowler
To start off, 2000 Plymouth Prowler 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 3,507 cc (6 cylinders), 2000 Plymouth Prowler is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Plymouth Prowler weights approximately 560 kg more than 1961 Austin A 40.
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 Plymouth Prowler (610 Nm) has 542 more torque (in Nm) than 1961 Austin A 40. (68 Nm). This means 2000 Plymouth Prowler 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 Plymouth Prowler | |
| Make | Austin | Plymouth |
| Model | A 40 | Prowler |
| Year Released | 1961 | 2000 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 948 cc | 3507 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 36 HP | 0 HP |
| Torque | 68 Nm | 610 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 64.6 mm | 96 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 76.2 mm | 81 mm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 760 kg | 1320 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3670 mm | 4210 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1520 mm | 1950 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1300 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2220 mm | 2880 mm |
