1968 Mazda R-100 vs. 2003 Ford Ecosport
To start off, 2003 Ford Ecosport is newer by 35 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1968 Mazda R-100. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1968 Mazda R-100 would be higher. At 1,963 cc, 1968 Mazda R-100 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1968 Mazda R-100 (110 HP) has 43 more horse power than 2003 Ford Ecosport. (67 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1968 Mazda R-100 should accelerate faster than 2003 Ford Ecosport.
Because 1968 Mazda R-100 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 1968 Mazda R-100. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Ford Ecosport, 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:
| 1968 Mazda R-100 | 2003 Ford Ecosport | |
| Make | Mazda | Ford |
| Model | R-100 | Ecosport |
| Year Released | 1968 | 2003 |
| Body Type | Coupe | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1963 cc | 1400 cc |
| Engine Type | dual-disk rotary | in-line |
| Horse Power | 110 HP | 67 HP |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 3840 mm | 4228 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1490 mm | 1980 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1679 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2270 mm | 2490 mm |
