1964 Austin A 40 vs. 2000 Dodge Avenger
To start off, 2000 Dodge Avenger is newer by 36 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 2,497 cc (6 cylinders), 2000 Dodge Avenger is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Dodge Avenger weights approximately 610 kg more than 1964 Austin A 40.
Because 1964 Austin A 40 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 1964 Austin A 40. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Dodge Avenger, 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. Let's talk about torque, 2000 Dodge Avenger (232 Nm) has 150 more torque (in Nm) than 1964 Austin A 40. (82 Nm). This means 2000 Dodge Avenger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1964 Austin A 40.
Compare all specifications:
| 1964 Austin A 40 | 2000 Dodge Avenger | |
| Make | Austin | Dodge |
| Model | A 40 | Avenger |
| Year Released | 1964 | 2000 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1098 cc | 2497 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 47 HP | 0 HP |
| Torque | 82 Nm | 232 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Doors | 3 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 760 kg | 1370 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3690 mm | 4760 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1520 mm | 1750 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1350 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2220 mm | 2640 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 29 L | 49 L |
