1949 AC 2-Litre vs. 2006 Mazda 5
To start off, 2006 Mazda 5 is newer by 57 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1949 AC 2-Litre. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1949 AC 2-Litre would be higher. At 2,262 cc (4 cylinders), 2006 Mazda 5 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Mazda 5 (157 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 81 more horse power than 1949 AC 2-Litre. (76 HP @ 4500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Mazda 5 should accelerate faster than 1949 AC 2-Litre.
Because 1949 AC 2-Litre 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 1949 AC 2-Litre. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Mazda 5, 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, 2006 Mazda 5 (201 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 65 more torque (in Nm) than 1949 AC 2-Litre. (136 Nm @ 2500 RPM). This means 2006 Mazda 5 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1949 AC 2-Litre.
Compare all specifications:
1949 AC 2-Litre | 2006 Mazda 5 | |
Make | AC | Mazda |
Model | 2-Litre | 5 |
Year Released | 1949 | 2006 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1991 cc | 2262 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 76 HP | 157 HP |
Engine RPM | 4500 RPM | 6500 RPM |
Torque | 136 Nm | 201 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2500 RPM | 4500 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 6 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4680 mm | 4620 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1760 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1560 mm | 1640 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2980 mm | 2760 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 52 L | 60 L |