1964 Austin A 40 vs. 2000 Nissan Sentra
To start off, 2000 Nissan Sentra 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 1,770 cc (4 cylinders), 2000 Nissan Sentra is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Nissan Sentra (152 HP @ 3600 RPM) has 105 more horse power than 1964 Austin A 40. (47 HP @ 5100 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2000 Nissan Sentra should accelerate faster 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 Nissan Sentra, 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 Nissan Sentra (176 Nm) has 94 more torque (in Nm) than 1964 Austin A 40. (82 Nm). This means 2000 Nissan Sentra 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 Nissan Sentra | |
Make | Austin | Nissan |
Model | A 40 | Sentra |
Year Released | 1964 | 2000 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1098 cc | 1770 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 47 HP | 152 HP |
Engine RPM | 5100 RPM | 3600 RPM |
Torque | 82 Nm | 176 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Doors | 3 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 3690 mm | 4520 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1520 mm | 1720 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1420 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2220 mm | 2540 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 29 L | 73 L |