1966 Austin A 40 vs. 2007 Mazda CX-9
To start off, 2007 Mazda CX-9 is newer by 41 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 3,496 cc (6 cylinders), 2007 Mazda CX-9 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2007 Mazda CX-9 (264 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 217 more horse power than 1966 Austin A 40. (47 HP @ 5100 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2007 Mazda CX-9 should accelerate faster than 1966 Austin A 40.
Because 2007 Mazda CX-9 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1966 Austin A 40. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2007 Mazda CX-9 will offer significantly more control. 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, 2007 Mazda CX-9 (338 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 257 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 Austin A 40. (81 Nm @ 2500 RPM). This means 2007 Mazda CX-9 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 | 2007 Mazda CX-9 | |
| Make | Austin | Mazda |
| Model | A 40 | CX-9 |
| Year Released | 1966 | 2007 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1098 cc | 3496 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 47 HP | 264 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5100 RPM | 6250 RPM |
| Torque | 81 Nm | 338 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2500 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Number of Doors | 3 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 3690 mm | 5080 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1520 mm | 1940 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1740 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2220 mm | 2880 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 29 L | 76 L |
