1963 AC Aceca vs. 2012 Mazda 3
To start off, 2012 Mazda 3 is newer by 49 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 AC Aceca. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 AC Aceca would be higher. At 2,184 cc (4 cylinders), 2012 Mazda 3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Mazda 3 (148 HP @ 3500 RPM) has 25 more horse power than 1963 AC Aceca. (123 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Mazda 3 should accelerate faster than 1963 AC Aceca.
Because 1963 AC Aceca 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 1963 AC Aceca. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 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. Let's talk about torque, 2012 Mazda 3 (360 Nm @ 1800 RPM) has 193 more torque (in Nm) than 1963 AC Aceca. (167 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2012 Mazda 3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1963 AC Aceca.
Compare all specifications:
1963 AC Aceca | 2012 Mazda 3 | |
Make | AC | Mazda |
Model | Aceca | 3 |
Year Released | 1963 | 2012 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1971 cc | 2184 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 123 HP | 148 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 3500 RPM |
Torque | 167 Nm | 360 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 1800 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4070 mm | 4590 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1560 mm | 1755 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1330 mm | 1471 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2290 mm | 2639 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 59 L | 55 L |