1962 Austin A 40 vs. 1980 Autobianchi A 112
To start off, 1980 Autobianchi A 112 is newer by 18 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 965 cc (4 cylinders), 1980 Autobianchi A 112 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1962 Austin A 40 weights approximately 100 kg more than 1980 Autobianchi A 112.
Because 1962 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 1962 Austin A 40. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1980 Autobianchi A 112, 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.
Compare all specifications:
1962 Austin A 40 | 1980 Autobianchi A 112 | |
Make | Austin | Autobianchi |
Model | A 40 | A 112 |
Year Released | 1962 | 1980 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 948 cc | 965 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 36 HP | 0 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 3 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 760 kg | 660 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3670 mm | 3280 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1520 mm | 1490 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1370 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2220 mm | 2050 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 45 L | 30 L |