1955 Ford 12 M vs. 2003 Mazda 3
To start off, 2003 Mazda 3 is newer by 48 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1955 Ford 12 M. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1955 Ford 12 M would be higher. At 1,498 cc (4 cylinders), 2003 Mazda 3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Mazda 3 (108 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 71 more horse power than 1955 Ford 12 M. (37 HP @ 4250 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2003 Mazda 3 should accelerate faster than 1955 Ford 12 M.
Because 1955 Ford 12 M 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 1955 Ford 12 M. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Mazda 3, 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:
| 1955 Ford 12 M | 2003 Mazda 3 | |
| Make | Ford | Mazda |
| Model | 12 M | 3 |
| Year Released | 1955 | 2003 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1172 cc | 1498 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 37 HP | 108 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4250 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Length | 4070 mm | 4500 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1590 mm | 1760 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1560 mm | 1470 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2500 mm | 2650 mm |
