1980 Austin Allegro vs. 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford
To start off, 1980 Austin Allegro is newer by 28 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford would be higher. At 2,441 cc (4 cylinders), 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford (105 HP @ 4800 RPM) has 61 more horse power than 1980 Austin Allegro. (44 HP @ 5250 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford should accelerate faster than 1980 Austin Allegro. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford weights approximately 715 kg more than 1980 Austin Allegro. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford (184 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 110 more torque (in Nm) than 1980 Austin Allegro. (74 Nm @ 2900 RPM). This means 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1980 Austin Allegro.
Compare all specifications:
| 1980 Austin Allegro | 1952 Austin-Healey Tickford | |
| Make | Austin | Austin-Healey |
| Model | Allegro | Tickford |
| Year Released | 1980 | 1952 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1098 cc | 2441 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 44 HP | 105 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5250 RPM | 4800 RPM |
| Torque | 74 Nm | 184 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2900 RPM | 3000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Vehicle Weight | 815 kg | 1530 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3200 mm | 4500 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1620 mm | 1710 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1400 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2450 mm | 2600 mm |
