1961 Abarth 2200 vs. 2010 Mazda 3
To start off, 2010 Mazda 3 is newer by 49 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1961 Abarth 2200. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1961 Abarth 2200 would be higher. At 2,160 cc (6 cylinders), 1961 Abarth 2200 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1961 Abarth 2200 (133 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 20 more horse power than 2010 Mazda 3. (113 HP @ 3600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1961 Abarth 2200 should accelerate faster than 2010 Mazda 3.
Because 1961 Abarth 2200 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 1961 Abarth 2200. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 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:
1961 Abarth 2200 | 2010 Mazda 3 | |
Make | Abarth | Mazda |
Model | 2200 | 3 |
Year Released | 1961 | 2010 |
Body Type | Convertible | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2160 cc | 1560 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 133 HP | 113 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 3600 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | 5-speed manual |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4590 mm | 4590 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1630 mm | 1755 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1340 mm | 1471 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2460 mm | 2639 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 27 L | 55 L |