1972 Austin 2200 vs. 2010 Mazda BT-50
To start off, 2010 Mazda BT-50 is newer by 38 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1972 Austin 2200. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1972 Austin 2200 would be higher. At 2,953 cc (4 cylinders), 2010 Mazda BT-50 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Mazda BT-50 (154 HP @ 3200 RPM) has 44 more horse power than 1972 Austin 2200. (110 HP @ 5250 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Mazda BT-50 should accelerate faster than 1972 Austin 2200.
Because 2010 Mazda BT-50 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1972 Austin 2200. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 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, 2010 Mazda BT-50 (380 Nm @ 180 RPM) has 211 more torque (in Nm) than 1972 Austin 2200. (169 Nm @ 3500 RPM). This means 2010 Mazda BT-50 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1972 Austin 2200.
Compare all specifications:
| 1972 Austin 2200 | 2010 Mazda BT-50 | |
| Make | Austin | Mazda |
| Model | 2200 | BT-50 |
| Year Released | 1972 | 2010 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2227 cc | 2953 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 110 HP | 154 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5250 RPM | 3200 RPM |
| Torque | 169 Nm | 380 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3500 RPM | 180 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 76.2 mm | 96.1 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 81.3 mm | 102 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.0:1 | 18.0:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
| Vehicle Height | 1440 mm | 1810 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2700 mm | 3010 mm |
