1969 Mazda Cosmo vs. 2010 Ford Ecosport
To start off, 2010 Ford Ecosport is newer by 41 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1969 Mazda Cosmo. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1969 Mazda Cosmo would be higher. At 1,962 cc, 1969 Mazda Cosmo is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Ford Ecosport (109 HP) has 16 more horse power than 1969 Mazda Cosmo. (93 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Ford Ecosport should accelerate faster than 1969 Mazda Cosmo.
Because 1969 Mazda Cosmo 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 1969 Mazda Cosmo. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 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:
1969 Mazda Cosmo | 2010 Ford Ecosport | |
Make | Mazda | Ford |
Model | Cosmo | Ecosport |
Year Released | 1969 | 2010 |
Body Type | Coupe | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1962 cc | 1600 cc |
Engine Type | dual-disk rotary | in-line |
Horse Power | 93 HP | 109 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4150 mm | 4228 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1600 mm | 1980 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1170 mm | 1679 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2210 mm | 2490 mm |