1962 Austin A 40 vs. 2005 Kia K2700
To start off, 2005 Kia K2700 is newer by 43 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 2,665 cc, 2005 Kia K2700 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Kia K2700 (83 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 47 more horse power than 1962 Austin A 40. (36 HP @ 5000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2005 Kia K2700 should accelerate faster than 1962 Austin A 40. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Kia K2700 weights approximately 770 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.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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, 2005 Kia K2700 (175 Nm @ 2400 RPM) has 107 more torque (in Nm) than 1962 Austin A 40. (68 Nm @ 2500 RPM). This means 2005 Kia K2700 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 | 2005 Kia K2700 | |
| Make | Austin | Kia |
| Model | A 40 | K2700 |
| Year Released | 1962 | 2005 |
| Engine Size | 948 cc | 2665 cc |
| Horse Power | 36 HP | 83 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Torque | 68 Nm | 175 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2500 RPM | 2400 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 64.6 mm | 94.5 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 76.2 mm | 95 mm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 760 kg | 1530 kg |
| Wheelbase Size | 2220 mm | 2390 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 45 L | 60 L |
