1966 DAF Daffodil vs. 1990 Mazda 626
To start off, 1990 Mazda 626 is newer by 24 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 DAF Daffodil. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 DAF Daffodil would be higher. At 1,789 cc (4 cylinders), 1990 Mazda 626 is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 1966 DAF Daffodil 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 1966 DAF Daffodil. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1990 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 1966 DAF Daffodil | 1990 Mazda 626 | |
| Make | DAF | Mazda |
| Model | Daffodil | 626 |
| Year Released | 1966 | 1990 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 746 cc | 1789 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 2 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 26 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Vehicle Length | 3620 mm | 4600 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1450 mm | 1700 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1380 mm | 1440 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2060 mm | 2580 mm |
