1964 Austin A 40 vs. 2010 Ford E-350
To start off, 2010 Ford E-350 is newer by 46 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 5,400 cc (4 cylinders), 2010 Ford E-350 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Ford E-350 (177 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 130 more horse power than 1964 Austin A 40. (47 HP @ 5100 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Ford E-350 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, 2010 Ford E-350, 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, 2010 Ford E-350 (184 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 102 more torque (in Nm) than 1964 Austin A 40. (82 Nm @ 2500 RPM). This means 2010 Ford E-350 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 | 2010 Ford E-350 | |
Make | Austin | Ford |
Model | A 40 | E-350 |
Year Released | 1964 | 2010 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1098 cc | 5400 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 47 HP | 177 HP |
Engine RPM | 5100 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 82 Nm | 184 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2500 RPM | 4500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Vehicle Length | 3690 mm | 4437 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1520 mm | 1806 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1720 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2220 mm | 2619 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 29 L | 57 L |