1962 Austin A 40 vs. 1998 ZAZ Wagon
To start off, 1998 ZAZ Wagon is newer by 36 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 1,091 cc (4 cylinders), 1998 ZAZ Wagon is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1998 ZAZ Wagon (51 HP @ 5300 RPM) has 15 more horse power than 1962 Austin A 40. (36 HP @ 5000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1998 ZAZ Wagon should accelerate faster than 1962 Austin A 40. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1962 Austin A 40 weights approximately 15 kg more than 1998 ZAZ Wagon.
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, 1998 ZAZ Wagon, 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 | 1998 ZAZ Wagon | |
| Make | Austin | ZAZ |
| Model | A 40 | Wagon |
| Year Released | 1962 | 1998 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 948 cc | 1091 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 36 HP | 51 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 5300 RPM |
| Torque RPM | 2500 RPM | 3000 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 64.6 mm | 72 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 76.2 mm | 67 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 8.3:1 | 9.5:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Vehicle Weight | 760 kg | 745 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3670 mm | 3830 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1520 mm | 1570 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1470 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2220 mm | 2330 mm |
