1965 Austin A 40 vs. 2000 Dodge Viper
To start off, 2000 Dodge Viper is newer by 35 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 Austin A 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 Austin A 40 would be higher. At 8,357 cc (10 cylinders), 2000 Dodge Viper is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Dodge Viper weights approximately 675 kg more than 1965 Austin A 40.
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 Dodge Viper (979 Nm) has 898 more torque (in Nm) than 1965 Austin A 40. (81 Nm). This means 2000 Dodge Viper will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1965 Austin A 40.
Compare all specifications:
| 1965 Austin A 40 | 2000 Dodge Viper | |
| Make | Austin | Dodge |
| Model | A 40 | Viper |
| Year Released | 1965 | 2000 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1098 cc | 8357 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 10 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 47 HP | 0 HP |
| Torque | 81 Nm | 979 Nm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Doors | 3 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 760 kg | 1435 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3690 mm | 4490 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1520 mm | 1930 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1200 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2220 mm | 2450 mm |
