1978 Chrysler 160 vs. 2006 Mazda 6
To start off, 2006 Mazda 6 is newer by 28 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1978 Chrysler 160. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1978 Chrysler 160 would be higher.
Because 1978 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 1978 Chrysler 160. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Mazda 6, 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:
| 1978 Chrysler 160 | 2006 Mazda 6 | |
| Make | Chrysler | Mazda |
| Model | 160 | 6 |
| Year Released | 1978 | 2006 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Horse Power | 89 HP | 0 HP |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Width | 1730 mm | 1840 mm |
