1965 Austin A 40 vs. 2008 Mazda Rustler
To start off, 2008 Mazda Rustler is newer by 43 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 1,586 cc, 2008 Mazda Rustler is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2008 Mazda Rustler weights approximately 254 kg more than 1965 Austin A 40.
Because 1965 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 1965 Austin A 40. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2008 Mazda Rustler, 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, 2008 Mazda Rustler (120 Nm @ 3800 RPM) has 39 more torque (in Nm) than 1965 Austin A 40. (81 Nm @ 2500 RPM). This means 2008 Mazda Rustler 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 | 2008 Mazda Rustler | |
| Make | Austin | Mazda |
| Model | A 40 | Rustler |
| Year Released | 1965 | 2008 |
| Engine Size | 1098 cc | 1586 cc |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 47 HP | 0 HP |
| Torque | 81 Nm | 120 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2500 RPM | 3800 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 64.6 mm | 81 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 83.7 mm | 77 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 8.5:1 | 9.8:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Doors | 3 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 760 kg | 1014 kg |
| Wheelbase Size | 2220 mm | 2570 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 29 L | 54 L |
