1972 Nissan 240 C vs. 2010 Mazda 3
To start off, 2010 Mazda 3 is newer by 38 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1972 Nissan 240 C. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1972 Nissan 240 C would be higher. At 2,500 cc (4 cylinders), 2010 Mazda 3 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1972 Nissan 240 C weights approximately 2 kg more than 2010 Mazda 3.
Because 1972 Nissan 240 C 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 Nissan 240 C. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 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. 2010 Mazda 3 has automatic transmission and 1972 Nissan 240 C has manual transmission. 1972 Nissan 240 C will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2010 Mazda 3 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 1972 Nissan 240 C | 2010 Mazda 3 | |
| Make | Nissan | Mazda |
| Model | 240 C | 3 |
| Year Released | 1972 | 2010 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2164 cc | 2500 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 167 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | 5-speed automatic |
| Vehicle Weight | 1385 kg | 1383 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4700 mm | 4506 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1700 mm | 1755 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1471 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2700 mm | 2639 mm |
