1978 Mazda RX-2 vs. 1969 Triumph 2000
To start off, 1978 Mazda RX-2 is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1969 Triumph 2000. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1969 Triumph 2000 would be higher. At 2,290 cc, 1978 Mazda RX-2 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1978 Mazda RX-2 (118 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 29 more horse power than 1969 Triumph 2000. (89 HP @ 5000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1978 Mazda RX-2 should accelerate faster than 1969 Triumph 2000. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1969 Triumph 2000 weights approximately 210 kg more than 1978 Mazda RX-2.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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, 1969 Triumph 2000 (158 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 1 more torque (in Nm) than 1978 Mazda RX-2. (157 Nm @ 3500 RPM). This means 1969 Triumph 2000 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1978 Mazda RX-2.
Compare all specifications:
| 1978 Mazda RX-2 | 1969 Triumph 2000 | |
| Make | Mazda | Triumph |
| Model | RX-2 | 2000 |
| Year Released | 1978 | 1969 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2290 cc | 1998 cc |
| Engine Type | dual-disk rotary | in-line |
| Horse Power | 118 HP | 89 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 5000 RPM |
| Torque | 157 Nm | 158 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3500 RPM | 3000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 960 kg | 1170 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4160 mm | 4640 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1590 mm | 1660 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2480 mm | 2700 mm |
