1976 Ford Falcon vs. 2006 Mazda 3
To start off, 2006 Mazda 3 is newer by 30 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1976 Ford Falcon. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1976 Ford Falcon would be higher. At 4,942 cc (8 cylinders), 1976 Ford Falcon is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1976 Ford Falcon (238 HP @ 5000 RPM) has 88 more horse power than 2006 Mazda 3. (150 HP @ 6500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1976 Ford Falcon should accelerate faster than 2006 Mazda 3.
Because 1976 Ford Falcon 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 1976 Ford Falcon. 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, 1976 Ford Falcon (422 Nm @ 2600 RPM) has 239 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Mazda 3. (183 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 1976 Ford Falcon will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Mazda 3.
Compare all specifications:
| 1976 Ford Falcon | 2006 Mazda 3 | |
| Make | Ford | Mazda |
| Model | Falcon | 3 |
| Year Released | 1976 | 2006 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4942 cc | 1999 cc |
| Horse Power | 238 HP | 150 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 6500 RPM |
| Torque | 422 Nm | 183 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2600 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 4540 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1910 mm | 1760 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1390 mm | 1470 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2830 mm | 2650 mm |
