1964 Ford Falcon vs. 1995 Mazda 626

To start off, 1995 Mazda 626 is newer by 31 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Ford Falcon. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Ford Falcon would be higher. At 2,890 cc (8 cylinders), 1964 Ford Falcon is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1964 Ford Falcon (282 HP @ 4400 RPM) has 208 more horse power than 1995 Mazda 626. (74 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1964 Ford Falcon should accelerate faster than 1995 Mazda 626. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1995 Mazda 626 weights approximately 555 kg more than 1964 Ford Falcon.

Because 1964 Ford Falcon 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 1964 Ford Falcon. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1995 Mazda 626, 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, 1964 Ford Falcon (244 Nm @ 2800 RPM) has 75 more torque (in Nm) than 1995 Mazda 626. (169 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 1964 Ford Falcon will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1995 Mazda 626.

Compare all specifications: