1966 Austin A 40 vs. 2000 Ford e-Ka

To start off, 2000 Ford e-Ka is newer by 34 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 1,758 cc (3 cylinders), 2000 Ford e-Ka is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Ford e-Ka (89 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 42 more horse power than 1966 Austin A 40. (47 HP @ 5100 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2000 Ford e-Ka should accelerate faster than 1966 Austin A 40. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Ford e-Ka weights approximately 446 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.

Because 1966 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 1966 Austin A 40. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Ford e-Ka, 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, 2000 Ford e-Ka (190 Nm) has 109 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 Austin A 40. (81 Nm). This means 2000 Ford e-Ka will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1966 Austin A 40.

Compare all specifications: