1962 AC Greyhound vs. 1980 Austin Mini Metro
To start off, 1980 Austin Mini Metro is newer by 18 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1962 AC Greyhound. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1962 AC Greyhound would be higher. At 1,971 cc (6 cylinders), 1962 AC Greyhound is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1962 AC Greyhound (123 HP @ 5750 RPM) has 78 more horse power than 1980 Austin Mini Metro. (45 HP @ 5500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1962 AC Greyhound should accelerate faster than 1980 Austin Mini Metro. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1962 AC Greyhound weights approximately 268 kg more than 1980 Austin Mini Metro. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 1962 AC Greyhound (179 Nm) has 106 more torque (in Nm) than 1980 Austin Mini Metro. (73 Nm). This means 1962 AC Greyhound will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1980 Austin Mini Metro.
Compare all specifications:
1962 AC Greyhound | 1980 Austin Mini Metro | |
Make | AC | Austin |
Model | Greyhound | Mini Metro |
Year Released | 1962 | 1980 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1971 cc | 998 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 123 HP | 45 HP |
Engine RPM | 5750 RPM | 5500 RPM |
Torque | 179 Nm | 73 Nm |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 3 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1015 kg | 747 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4580 mm | 3410 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1670 mm | 1550 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1340 mm | 1370 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2550 mm | 2260 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 54 L | 31 L |