1966 Ford GT 40 vs. 2012 Mazda 3
To start off, 2012 Mazda 3 is newer by 46 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Ford GT 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Ford GT 40 would be higher. At 4,195 cc (8 cylinders), 1966 Ford GT 40 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1966 Ford GT 40 (350 HP @ 7200 RPM) has 202 more horse power than 2012 Mazda 3. (148 HP @ 3500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1966 Ford GT 40 should accelerate faster than 2012 Mazda 3.
Because 1966 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 1966 Ford GT 40. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 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. Let's talk about torque, 2012 Mazda 3 (360 Nm) has 275 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 Ford GT 40. (85 Nm). This means 2012 Mazda 3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1966 Ford GT 40.
Compare all specifications:
1966 Ford GT 40 | 2012 Mazda 3 | |
Make | Ford | Mazda |
Model | GT 40 | 3 |
Year Released | 1966 | 2012 |
Body Type | Coupe | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Middle | Front |
Engine Size | 4195 cc | 2184 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 350 HP | 148 HP |
Engine RPM | 7200 RPM | 3500 RPM |
Torque | 85 Nm | 360 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | 5-speed manual |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4150 mm | 4590 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1755 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1040 mm | 1471 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2420 mm | 2639 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 125 L | 55 L |