1966 Austin A 40 vs. 2009 Buick Lucerne
To start off, 2009 Buick Lucerne is newer by 43 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 3,879 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Buick Lucerne is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Buick Lucerne (224 HP @ 5700 RPM) has 177 more horse power than 1966 Austin A 40. (47 HP @ 5100 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Buick Lucerne should accelerate faster than 1966 Austin A 40.
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, 2009 Buick Lucerne, 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, 2009 Buick Lucerne (237 Nm @ 3200 RPM) has 156 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 Austin A 40. (81 Nm @ 2500 RPM). This means 2009 Buick Lucerne 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 | 2009 Buick Lucerne | |
Make | Austin | Buick |
Model | A 40 | Lucerne |
Year Released | 1966 | 2009 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1098 cc | 3879 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 47 HP | 224 HP |
Engine RPM | 5100 RPM | 5700 RPM |
Torque | 81 Nm | 237 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2500 RPM | 3200 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 8.5:1 | 9.8:1 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Doors | 3 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Width | 1520 mm | 1880 mm |