1964 Austin A 40 vs. 1965 Nissan Bluebird
To start off, 1965 Nissan Bluebird is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Austin A 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Austin A 40 would be higher. At 1,189 cc (4 cylinders), 1965 Nissan Bluebird is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1965 Nissan Bluebird (53 HP @ 4800 RPM) has 6 more horse power than 1964 Austin A 40. (47 HP @ 5100 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1965 Nissan Bluebird should accelerate faster than 1964 Austin A 40. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1965 Nissan Bluebird weights approximately 140 kg more than 1964 Austin A 40. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 1965 Nissan Bluebird is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1964 Austin A 40. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1965 Nissan Bluebird 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.
Compare all specifications:
1964 Austin A 40 | 1965 Nissan Bluebird | |
Make | Austin | Nissan |
Model | A 40 | Bluebird |
Year Released | 1964 | 1965 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1098 cc | 1189 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 47 HP | 53 HP |
Engine RPM | 5100 RPM | 4800 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
Vehicle Weight | 760 kg | 900 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3690 mm | 3920 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1520 mm | 1500 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1480 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2220 mm | 2290 mm |