1966 Austin A 40 vs. 1967 Triumph 2000
To start off, 1967 Triumph 2000 is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Austin A 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Austin A 40 would be higher. At 1,998 cc (6 cylinders), 1967 Triumph 2000 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1967 Triumph 2000 (89 HP @ 5000 RPM) has 42 more horse power than 1966 Austin A 40. (47 HP @ 5100 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1967 Triumph 2000 should accelerate faster than 1966 Austin A 40. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1967 Triumph 2000 weights approximately 408 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.
Let's talk about torque, 1967 Triumph 2000 (158 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 77 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 Austin A 40. (81 Nm @ 2500 RPM). This means 1967 Triumph 2000 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1966 Austin A 40.
Compare all specifications:
1966 Austin A 40 | 1967 Triumph 2000 | |
Make | Austin | Triumph |
Model | A 40 | 2000 |
Year Released | 1966 | 1967 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1098 cc | 1998 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 47 HP | 89 HP |
Engine RPM | 5100 RPM | 5000 RPM |
Torque | 81 Nm | 158 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2500 RPM | 3000 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 64.6 mm | 74.8 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 83.7 mm | 76 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 8.5:1 | 9.3:1 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Number of Doors | 3 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 762 kg | 1170 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3690 mm | 4420 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1520 mm | 1660 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1430 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2220 mm | 2700 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 29 L | 64 L |