1962 Austin A 60 vs. 1948 Jeep CJ2A
To start off, 1962 Austin A 60 is newer by 14 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1948 Jeep CJ2A. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1948 Jeep CJ2A would be higher. At 2,198 cc (4 cylinders), 1948 Jeep CJ2A is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1948 Jeep CJ2A (59 HP) has 20 more horse power than 1962 Austin A 60. (39 HP) In normal driving conditions, 1948 Jeep CJ2A should accelerate faster than 1962 Austin A 60. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1962 Austin A 60 weights approximately 8 kg more than 1948 Jeep CJ2A.
Because 1948 Jeep CJ2A is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1962 Austin A 60. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1948 Jeep CJ2A will offer significantly more control. 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, 1948 Jeep CJ2A (145 Nm) has 58 more torque (in Nm) than 1962 Austin A 60. (87 Nm). This means 1948 Jeep CJ2A will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1962 Austin A 60.
Compare all specifications:
| 1962 Austin A 60 | 1948 Jeep CJ2A | |
| Make | Austin | Jeep |
| Model | A 60 | CJ2A |
| Year Released | 1962 | 1948 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1487 cc | 2198 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 39 HP | 59 HP |
| Torque | 87 Nm | 145 Nm |
| Fuel Type | Diesel | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 1118 kg | 1110 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4440 mm | 3130 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1610 mm | 1460 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1480 mm | 1630 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2550 mm | 2040 mm |
