1966 Austin A 40 vs. 2011 Mazda BT-50
To start off, 2011 Mazda BT-50 is newer by 45 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 2,953 cc (4 cylinders), 2011 Mazda BT-50 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2011 Mazda BT-50 (154 HP @ 3200 RPM) has 107 more horse power than 1966 Austin A 40. (47 HP @ 5100 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2011 Mazda BT-50 should accelerate faster than 1966 Austin A 40.
Because 2011 Mazda BT-50 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, 2011 Mazda BT-50 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, 2011 Mazda BT-50 (380 Nm @ 180 RPM) has 299 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 Austin A 40. (81 Nm @ 2500 RPM). This means 2011 Mazda BT-50 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 | 2011 Mazda BT-50 | |
Make | Austin | Mazda |
Model | A 40 | BT-50 |
Year Released | 1966 | 2011 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1098 cc | 2953 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 47 HP | 154 HP |
Engine RPM | 5100 RPM | 3200 RPM |
Torque | 81 Nm | 380 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2500 RPM | 180 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 64.6 mm | 96.1 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 83.7 mm | 102 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 8.5:1 | 18.0:1 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
Number of Doors | 3 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1810 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2220 mm | 3010 mm |