1964 Ford GT 40 vs. 2006 Mazda 3
To start off, 2006 Mazda 3 is newer by 42 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Ford GT 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Ford GT 40 would be higher. At 4,195 cc (8 cylinders), 1964 Ford GT 40 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Mazda 3 weights approximately 376 kg more than 1964 Ford GT 40.
Because 1964 Ford GT 40 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 GT 40. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 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:
1964 Ford GT 40 | 2006 Mazda 3 | |
Make | Ford | Mazda |
Model | GT 40 | 3 |
Year Released | 1964 | 2006 |
Body Type | Coupe | Sedan |
Engine Position | Middle | Front |
Engine Size | 4195 cc | 1598 cc |
Horse Power | 350 HP | 0 HP |
Engine Bore Size | 95.6 mm | 78 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 72.9 mm | 83.6 mm |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 864 kg | 1240 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4030 mm | 4500 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1760 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1040 mm | 1470 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2420 mm | 2650 mm |