1966 Austin A 40 vs. 1959 Lincoln Continental
To start off, 1966 Austin A 40 is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1959 Lincoln Continental. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1959 Lincoln Continental would be higher. At 7,043 cc (8 cylinders), 1959 Lincoln Continental is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1959 Lincoln Continental (349 HP) has 302 more horse power than 1966 Austin A 40. (47 HP) In normal driving conditions, 1959 Lincoln Continental should accelerate faster than 1966 Austin A 40. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1959 Lincoln Continental weights approximately 1461 kg more than 1966 Austin A 40. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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:
1966 Austin A 40 | 1959 Lincoln Continental | |
Make | Austin | Lincoln |
Model | A 40 | Continental |
Year Released | 1966 | 1959 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1098 cc | 7043 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 47 HP | 349 HP |
Engine Bore Size | 64.6 mm | 109.2 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 83.7 mm | 94 mm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Vehicle Weight | 762 kg | 2223 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3690 mm | 5770 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1520 mm | 2050 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1490 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2220 mm | 3330 mm |