1962 Austin A 99 vs. 2004 Ford Ecosport
To start off, 2004 Ford Ecosport is newer by 42 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1962 Austin A 99. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1962 Austin A 99 would be higher. At 2,912 cc (6 cylinders), 1962 Austin A 99 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1962 Austin A 99 (110 HP) has 1 more horse power than 2004 Ford Ecosport. (109 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1962 Austin A 99 should accelerate faster than 2004 Ford Ecosport.
Because 1962 Austin A 99 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 99. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Ford Ecosport, 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 99 | 2004 Ford Ecosport | |
Make | Austin | Ford |
Model | A 99 | Ecosport |
Year Released | 1962 | 2004 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2912 cc | 1600 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 110 HP | 109 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4950 mm | 4228 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1750 mm | 1980 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1540 mm | 1679 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2800 mm | 2490 mm |