1964 Austin A 90 vs. 2012 Ford Ecosport
To start off, 2012 Ford Ecosport is newer by 48 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Austin A 90. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Austin A 90 would be higher. At 2,912 cc (6 cylinders), 1964 Austin A 90 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1964 Austin A 90 (120 HP) has 2 more horse power than 2012 Ford Ecosport. (118 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1964 Austin A 90 should accelerate faster than 2012 Ford Ecosport.
Because 1964 Austin A 90 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 90. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 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. Let's talk about torque, 1964 Austin A 90 (221 Nm @ 2750 RPM) has 51 more torque (in Nm) than 2012 Ford Ecosport. (170 Nm @ 1300 RPM). This means 1964 Austin A 90 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2012 Ford Ecosport.
Compare all specifications:
| 1964 Austin A 90 | 2012 Ford Ecosport | |
| Make | Austin | Ford |
| Model | A 90 | Ecosport |
| Year Released | 1964 | 2012 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2912 cc | 1000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 120 HP | 118 HP |
| Torque | 221 Nm | 170 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2750 RPM | 1300 RPM |
| 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 |
