1966 Austin A 40 vs. 2009 Jeep Patriot
To start off, 2009 Jeep Patriot 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 1,997 cc (4 cylinders), 2009 Jeep Patriot is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Jeep Patriot (156 HP @ 6400 RPM) has 109 more horse power than 1966 Austin A 40. (47 HP @ 5100 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Jeep Patriot should accelerate faster than 1966 Austin A 40.
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. Let's talk about torque, 2009 Jeep Patriot (141 Nm @ 5000 RPM) has 60 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 Austin A 40. (81 Nm @ 2500 RPM). This means 2009 Jeep Patriot 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 Jeep Patriot | |
| Make | Austin | Jeep |
| Model | A 40 | Patriot |
| Year Released | 1966 | 2009 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1098 cc | 1997 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 47 HP | 156 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5100 RPM | 6400 RPM |
| Torque | 81 Nm | 141 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2500 RPM | 5000 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 64.6 mm | 81 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 83.7 mm | 95.5 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 8.5:1 | 10.5:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Doors | 3 doors | 5 doors |
