1950 Bristol 450 vs. 2009 Mazda CX-9
To start off, 2009 Mazda CX-9 is newer by 59 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1950 Bristol 450. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1950 Bristol 450 would be higher. At 3,727 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Mazda CX-9 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Mazda CX-9 (268 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 115 more horse power than 1950 Bristol 450. (153 HP @ 5500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mazda CX-9 should accelerate faster than 1950 Bristol 450.
Because 1950 Bristol 450 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 1950 Bristol 450. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Mazda CX-9, 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.
Compare all specifications:
1950 Bristol 450 | 2009 Mazda CX-9 | |
Make | Bristol | Mazda |
Model | 450 | CX-9 |
Year Released | 1950 | 2009 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1971 cc | 3727 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 153 HP | 268 HP |
Engine RPM | 5500 RPM | 6250 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4480 mm | 4600 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1660 mm | 1940 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1530 mm | 1730 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2480 mm | 2340 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 54 L | 76 L |