1962 Austin A 40 vs. 2005 Smart ForTwo
To start off, 2005 Smart ForTwo 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 948 cc (4 cylinders), 1962 Austin A 40 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Smart ForTwo (74 HP @ 5250 RPM) has 38 more horse power than 1962 Austin A 40. (36 HP @ 5000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2005 Smart ForTwo should accelerate faster than 1962 Austin A 40.
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 Smart ForTwo (110 Nm @ 2200 RPM) has 42 more torque (in Nm) than 1962 Austin A 40. (68 Nm @ 2500 RPM). This means 2005 Smart ForTwo 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 Smart ForTwo | |
Make | Austin | Smart |
Model | A 40 | ForTwo |
Year Released | 1962 | 2005 |
Engine Position | Front | Rear |
Engine Size | 948 cc | 698 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 36 HP | 74 HP |
Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 5250 RPM |
Torque | 68 Nm | 110 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2500 RPM | 2200 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 8.3:1 | 9.0:1 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 3 doors |
Vehicle Length | 3670 mm | 2510 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1520 mm | 1520 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1560 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2220 mm | 1820 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 45 L | 33 L |