2003 Audi A2 vs. 1965 Riley Kestrel
To start off, 2003 Audi A2 is newer by 38 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 Riley Kestrel. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 Riley Kestrel would be higher. At 1,390 cc (4 cylinders), 2003 Audi A2 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Audi A2 (74 HP @ 5000 RPM) has 21 more horse power than 1965 Riley Kestrel. (53 HP @ 5500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2003 Audi A2 should accelerate faster than 1965 Riley Kestrel. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Audi A2 weights approximately 10 kg more than 1965 Riley Kestrel. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear wheel drive vehicles. 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, 2003 Audi A2 (126 Nm @ 3800 RPM) has 42 more torque (in Nm) than 1965 Riley Kestrel. (84 Nm @ 2500 RPM). This means 2003 Audi A2 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1965 Riley Kestrel.
Compare all specifications:
2003 Audi A2 | 1965 Riley Kestrel | |
Make | Audi | Riley |
Model | A2 | Kestrel |
Year Released | 2003 | 1965 |
Engine Size | 1390 cc | 1098 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 74 HP | 53 HP |
Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 5500 RPM |
Torque | 126 Nm | 84 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3800 RPM | 2500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline - Premium | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Vehicle Weight | 895 kg | 885 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3830 mm | 3730 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1680 mm | 1540 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1560 mm | 1350 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2410 mm | 2380 mm |