1975 Chrysler 160 vs. 2009 Mazda CX-9
To start off, 2009 Mazda CX-9 is newer by 34 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1975 Chrysler 160. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1975 Chrysler 160 would be higher. At 3,727 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Mazda CX-9 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Mazda CX-9 (268 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 189 more horse power than 1975 Chrysler 160. (79 HP @ 5600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mazda CX-9 should accelerate faster than 1975 Chrysler 160.
Because 1975 Chrysler 160 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 1975 Chrysler 160. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Mazda CX-9, 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, 2009 Mazda CX-9 (269 Nm @ 4250 RPM) has 144 more torque (in Nm) than 1975 Chrysler 160. (125 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2009 Mazda CX-9 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1975 Chrysler 160.
Compare all specifications:
| 1975 Chrysler 160 | 2009 Mazda CX-9 | |
| Make | Chrysler | Mazda |
| Model | 160 | CX-9 |
| Year Released | 1975 | 2009 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1639 cc | 3727 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 79 HP | 268 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 6250 RPM |
| Torque | 125 Nm | 269 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 4250 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Vehicle Length | 4540 mm | 4600 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1730 mm | 1940 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1440 mm | 1730 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 2340 mm |
