1962 Austin A 40 vs. 1967 Nissan Cedric
To start off, 1967 Nissan Cedric is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1962 Austin A 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1962 Austin A 40 would be higher. At 2,164 cc (4 cylinders), 1967 Nissan Cedric is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1967 Nissan Cedric (66 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 30 more horse power than 1962 Austin A 40. (36 HP @ 5000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1967 Nissan Cedric should accelerate faster than 1962 Austin A 40. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1967 Nissan Cedric weights approximately 560 kg more than 1962 Austin A 40. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 1967 Nissan Cedric (146 Nm @ 1800 RPM) has 78 more torque (in Nm) than 1962 Austin A 40. (68 Nm @ 2500 RPM). This means 1967 Nissan Cedric will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1962 Austin A 40.
Compare all specifications:
| 1962 Austin A 40 | 1967 Nissan Cedric | |
| Make | Austin | Nissan |
| Model | A 40 | Cedric |
| Year Released | 1962 | 1967 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 948 cc | 2164 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 36 HP | 66 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Torque | 68 Nm | 146 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2500 RPM | 1800 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Vehicle Weight | 760 kg | 1320 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3670 mm | 4700 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1520 mm | 1700 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1470 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2220 mm | 2700 mm |
