1967 Austin A 40 vs. 2000 Toyota Corolla
To start off, 2000 Toyota Corolla is newer by 33 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1967 Austin A 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1967 Austin A 40 would be higher. At 1,867 cc (4 cylinders), 2000 Toyota Corolla is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Toyota Corolla (68 HP @ 4600 RPM) has 21 more horse power than 1967 Austin A 40. (47 HP @ 5100 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2000 Toyota Corolla should accelerate faster than 1967 Austin A 40.
Because 1967 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 1967 Austin A 40. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Toyota Corolla, 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 Toyota Corolla (127 Nm @ 2500 RPM) has 46 more torque (in Nm) than 1967 Austin A 40. (81 Nm @ 2500 RPM). This means 2000 Toyota Corolla will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1967 Austin A 40.
Compare all specifications:
1967 Austin A 40 | 2000 Toyota Corolla | |
Make | Austin | Toyota |
Model | A 40 | Corolla |
Year Released | 1967 | 2000 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1096 cc | 1867 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 47 HP | 68 HP |
Engine RPM | 5100 RPM | 4600 RPM |
Torque | 81 Nm | 127 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2500 RPM | 2500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Doors | 3 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 3690 mm | 4430 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1520 mm | 1700 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1390 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2220 mm | 2480 mm |