1961 Austin A 40 vs. 2009 Mazda 6
To start off, 2009 Mazda 6 is newer by 48 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 2,487 cc (4 cylinders), 2009 Mazda 6 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Mazda 6 (168 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 132 more horse power than 1961 Austin A 40. (36 HP @ 5000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mazda 6 should accelerate faster than 1961 Austin A 40.
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, 2009 Mazda 6, 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. Let's talk about torque, 2009 Mazda 6 (167 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 99 more torque (in Nm) than 1961 Austin A 40. (68 Nm @ 2500 RPM). This means 2009 Mazda 6 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 | 2009 Mazda 6 | |
Make | Austin | Mazda |
Model | A 40 | 6 |
Year Released | 1961 | 2009 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 948 cc | 2487 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 36 HP | 168 HP |
Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 68 Nm | 167 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2500 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Width | 1520 mm | 1850 mm |