1950 Buick 40 vs. 1978 Mazda RX-2
To start off, 1978 Mazda RX-2 is newer by 28 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1950 Buick 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1950 Buick 40 would be higher. At 4,065 cc (8 cylinders), 1950 Buick 40 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1978 Mazda RX-2 (118 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 4 more horse power than 1950 Buick 40. (114 HP @ 3600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1978 Mazda RX-2 should accelerate faster than 1950 Buick 40. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1950 Buick 40 weights approximately 680 kg more than 1978 Mazda RX-2.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front 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, 1950 Buick 40 (285 Nm @ 2000 RPM) has 128 more torque (in Nm) than 1978 Mazda RX-2. (157 Nm @ 3500 RPM). This means 1950 Buick 40 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1978 Mazda RX-2.
Compare all specifications:
| 1950 Buick 40 | 1978 Mazda RX-2 | |
| Make | Buick | Mazda |
| Model | 40 | RX-2 |
| Year Released | 1950 | 1978 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4065 cc | 2290 cc |
| Engine Type | in-line | dual-disk rotary |
| Horse Power | 114 HP | 118 HP |
| Engine RPM | 3600 RPM | 6500 RPM |
| Torque | 285 Nm | 157 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 3500 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1640 kg | 960 kg |
| Vehicle Width | 1950 mm | 1590 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3090 mm | 2480 mm |
