1965 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III vs. 1959 Ford 12 M
To start off, 1965 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1959 Ford 12 M. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1959 Ford 12 M would be higher. At 2,912 cc (6 cylinders), 1965 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1965 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III (146 HP @ 5250 RPM) has 93 more horse power than 1959 Ford 12 M. (53 HP @ 4250 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1965 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III should accelerate faster than 1959 Ford 12 M.
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.
Compare all specifications:
| 1965 Austin-Healey 3000 Mk III | 1959 Ford 12 M | |
| Make | Austin-Healey | Ford |
| Model | 3000 Mk III | 12 M |
| Year Released | 1965 | 1959 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2912 cc | 1497 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 146 HP | 53 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5250 RPM | 4250 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Length | 4010 mm | 4070 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1540 mm | 1580 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1250 mm | 1620 mm |
