1962 Ford Thunderbird vs. 2001 Mazda CU-X
To start off, 2001 Mazda CU-X is newer by 39 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 246 more horse power than 2001 Mazda CU-X. (99 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1962 Ford Thunderbird should accelerate faster than 2001 Mazda CU-X. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1962 Ford Thunderbird weights approximately 530 kg more than 2001 Mazda CU-X. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 1962 Ford Thunderbird 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 1962 Ford Thunderbird. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2001 Mazda CU-X, 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:
1962 Ford Thunderbird | 2001 Mazda CU-X | |
Make | Ford | Mazda |
Model | Thunderbird | CU-X |
Year Released | 1962 | 2001 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 6964 cc | 1970 cc |
Horse Power | 345 HP | 99 HP |
Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Vehicle Weight | 1875 kg | 1345 kg |
Wheelbase Size | 2880 mm | 2680 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 40 L | 80 L |