1975 Lada S vs. 2000 Mazda 626
To start off, 2000 Mazda 626 is newer by 25 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1975 Lada S. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1975 Lada S would be higher. At 1,840 cc (4 cylinders), 2000 Mazda 626 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Mazda 626 weights approximately 240 kg more than 1975 Lada S.
Because 1975 Lada S 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 Lada S. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Mazda 626, 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:
1975 Lada S | 2000 Mazda 626 | |
Make | Lada | Mazda |
Model | S | 626 |
Year Released | 1975 | 2000 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1294 cc | 1840 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 100 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1000 kg | 1240 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4050 mm | 4680 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1620 mm | 1720 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1520 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2470 mm | 2680 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 43 L | 64 L |