1964 Austin Princess vs. 2000 BMW Z9
To start off, 2000 BMW Z9 is newer by 36 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Austin Princess. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Austin Princess would be higher. At 4,398 cc (8 cylinders), 2000 BMW Z9 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 BMW Z9 (282 HP @ 5400 RPM) has 163 more horse power than 1964 Austin Princess. (119 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2000 BMW Z9 should accelerate faster than 1964 Austin Princess.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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 BMW Z9 (440 Nm @ 3600 RPM) has 189 more torque (in Nm) than 1964 Austin Princess. (251 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 2000 BMW Z9 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1964 Austin Princess.
Compare all specifications:
| 1964 Austin Princess | 2000 BMW Z9 | |
| Make | Austin | BMW |
| Model | Princess | Z9 |
| Year Released | 1964 | 2000 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3993 cc | 4398 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 119 HP | 282 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 5400 RPM |
| Torque | 251 Nm | 440 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 3600 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Length | 5470 mm | 5010 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1900 mm | 2010 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1780 mm | 1360 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3360 mm | 3110 mm |
