2009 Audi A3 vs. 1981 Zastava 132

To start off, 2009 Audi A3 is newer by 28 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1981 Zastava 132. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1981 Zastava 132 would be higher. At 1,968 cc, 2009 Audi A3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Audi A3 (138 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 32 more horse power than 1981 Zastava 132. (106 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Audi A3 should accelerate faster than 1981 Zastava 132. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1981 Zastava 132 weights approximately 165 kg more than 2009 Audi A3.

Because 1981 Zastava 132 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 1981 Zastava 132. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Audi A3, 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, 2009 Audi A3 (320 Nm @ 1750 RPM) has 178 more torque (in Nm) than 1981 Zastava 132. (142 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2009 Audi A3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1981 Zastava 132. 2009 Audi A3 has automatic transmission and 1981 Zastava 132 has manual transmission. 1981 Zastava 132 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2009 Audi A3 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.

Compare all specifications: