1965 Cadillac Sixty vs. 2002 Mazda 6
To start off, 2002 Mazda 6 is newer by 37 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 Cadillac Sixty. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 Cadillac Sixty would be higher. At 7,029 cc (8 cylinders), 1965 Cadillac Sixty is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1965 Cadillac Sixty (208 HP @ 4600 RPM) has 60 more horse power than 2002 Mazda 6. (148 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1965 Cadillac Sixty should accelerate faster than 2002 Mazda 6. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1965 Cadillac Sixty weights approximately 690 kg more than 2002 Mazda 6. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 1965 Cadillac Sixty 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 1965 Cadillac Sixty. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2002 Mazda 6, 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:
1965 Cadillac Sixty | 2002 Mazda 6 | |
Make | Cadillac | Mazda |
Model | Sixty | 6 |
Year Released | 1965 | 2002 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 7029 cc | 1997 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 208 HP | 148 HP |
Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 2115 kg | 1425 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5790 mm | 4710 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1990 mm | 1790 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1490 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3390 mm | 2680 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 95 L | 64 L |