1962 Ford Thunderbird vs. 1980 Mazda Cosmo
To start off, 1980 Mazda Cosmo is newer by 18 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1962 Ford Thunderbird. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1962 Ford Thunderbird would be higher. At 6,964 cc (8 cylinders), 1962 Ford Thunderbird is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1962 Ford Thunderbird (345 HP @ 5600 RPM) has 252 more horse power than 1980 Mazda Cosmo. (93 HP @ 5500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1962 Ford Thunderbird should accelerate faster than 1980 Mazda Cosmo. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1962 Ford Thunderbird weights approximately 785 kg more than 1980 Mazda Cosmo. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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.
Compare all specifications:
| 1962 Ford Thunderbird | 1980 Mazda Cosmo | |
| Make | Ford | Mazda |
| Model | Thunderbird | Cosmo |
| Year Released | 1962 | 1980 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6964 cc | 1769 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 345 HP | 93 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1875 kg | 1090 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5210 mm | 4480 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1930 mm | 1690 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1340 mm | 1340 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2880 mm | 2520 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 40 L | 65 L |
