1964 Austin Princess vs. 2012 Nissan Micra
To start off, 2012 Nissan Micra is newer by 48 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 3,993 cc (6 cylinders), 1964 Austin Princess is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1964 Austin Princess (119 HP) has 40 more horse power than 2012 Nissan Micra. (79 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1964 Austin Princess should accelerate faster than 2012 Nissan Micra.
Because 1964 Austin Princess 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 Princess. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 Nissan Micra, 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 Princess (251 Nm) has 143 more torque (in Nm) than 2012 Nissan Micra. (108 Nm). This means 1964 Austin Princess will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2012 Nissan Micra.
Compare all specifications:
1964 Austin Princess | 2012 Nissan Micra | |
Make | Austin | Nissan |
Model | Princess | Micra |
Year Released | 1964 | 2012 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3993 cc | 1200 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 119 HP | 79 HP |
Torque | 251 Nm | 108 Nm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 5470 mm | 3780 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1900 mm | 1666 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1780 mm | 1514 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3360 mm | 2449 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 72 L | 46 L |