1967 Austin A 40 vs. 2008 Nissan X-Trail
To start off, 2008 Nissan X-Trail is newer by 41 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 2,486 cc (4 cylinders), 2008 Nissan X-Trail is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2008 Nissan X-Trail weights approximately 634 kg more than 1967 Austin A 40.
Because 2008 Nissan X-Trail is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1967 Austin A 40. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2008 Nissan X-Trail 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, 2008 Nissan X-Trail (245 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 164 more torque (in Nm) than 1967 Austin A 40. (81 Nm @ 2500 RPM). This means 2008 Nissan X-Trail 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 | 2008 Nissan X-Trail | |
| Make | Austin | Nissan |
| Model | A 40 | X-Trail |
| Year Released | 1967 | 2008 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1096 cc | 2486 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 47 HP | 0 HP |
| Torque | 81 Nm | 245 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2500 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 64.6 mm | 89 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 83.7 mm | 100 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 8.5:1 | 9.5:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Number of Doors | 3 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 760 kg | 1394 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3690 mm | 4650 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1670 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2220 mm | 2630 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 29 L | 60 L |
