1965 Ford Mustang vs. 2003 Mazda 6
To start off, 2003 Mazda 6 is newer by 38 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 Ford Mustang. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 Ford Mustang would be higher. At 2,786 cc (6 cylinders), 1965 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Mazda 6 (145 HP @ 3500 RPM) has 45 more horse power than 1965 Ford Mustang. (100 HP @ 4400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2003 Mazda 6 should accelerate faster than 1965 Ford Mustang. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Mazda 6 weights approximately 510 kg more than 1965 Ford Mustang. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 1965 Ford Mustang 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 Ford Mustang. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 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 Ford Mustang | 2003 Mazda 6 | |
Make | Ford | Mazda |
Model | Mustang | 6 |
Year Released | 1965 | 2003 |
Body Type | Coupe | Station Wagon |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2786 cc | 1989 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 100 HP | 145 HP |
Engine RPM | 4400 RPM | 3500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 975 kg | 1485 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4620 mm | 4690 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1740 mm | 1790 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1310 mm | 1440 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2750 mm | 2680 mm |