1967 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 2006 Mazda 3
To start off, 2006 Mazda 3 is newer by 39 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1967 Chevrolet Camaro. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1967 Chevrolet Camaro would be higher. At 5,354 cc (8 cylinders), 1967 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1967 Chevrolet Camaro (276 HP @ 4800 RPM) has 126 more horse power than 2006 Mazda 3. (150 HP @ 6500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1967 Chevrolet Camaro should accelerate faster than 2006 Mazda 3.
Because 1967 Chevrolet Camaro 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 1967 Chevrolet Camaro. 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. Let's talk about torque, 1967 Chevrolet Camaro (481 Nm @ 3200 RPM) has 298 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Mazda 3. (183 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 1967 Chevrolet Camaro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Mazda 3.
Compare all specifications:
1967 Chevrolet Camaro | 2006 Mazda 3 | |
Make | Chevrolet | Mazda |
Model | Camaro | 3 |
Year Released | 1967 | 2006 |
Body Type | Coupe | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5354 cc | 1999 cc |
Horse Power | 276 HP | 150 HP |
Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 6500 RPM |
Torque | 481 Nm | 183 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3200 RPM | 4500 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4700 mm | 4540 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1840 mm | 1760 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1300 mm | 1470 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2750 mm | 2650 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 76 L | 55 L |