1972 BMW 520 vs. 2006 Mazda 3
To start off, 2006 Mazda 3 is newer by 34 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1972 BMW 520. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1972 BMW 520 would be higher. At 1,999 cc, 2006 Mazda 3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, both vehicles can yield 150 horse power. So under normal driving conditions, the acceleration of both vehicles should be relatively similar.
Because 1972 BMW 520 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 1972 BMW 520. 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, 1972 BMW 520 (190 Nm @ 4200 RPM) has 7 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Mazda 3. (183 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 1972 BMW 520 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Mazda 3.
Compare all specifications:
1972 BMW 520 | 2006 Mazda 3 | |
Make | BMW | Mazda |
Model | 520 | 3 |
Year Released | 1972 | 2006 |
Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1991 cc | 1999 cc |
Horse Power | 150 HP | 150 HP |
Engine RPM | 5900 RPM | 6500 RPM |
Torque | 190 Nm | 183 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4200 RPM | 4500 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4630 mm | 4540 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1700 mm | 1760 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1470 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2770 mm | 2650 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 7.3 L/100km | 6.7 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 12.4 L/100km | 8.4 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 9.2 L/100km | 7.6 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 80 L | 55 L |