1978 Mazda RX-3 vs. 2009 Mazda CX-9
To start off, 2009 Mazda CX-9 is newer by 31 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1978 Mazda RX-3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1978 Mazda RX-3 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 168 more horse power than 1978 Mazda RX-3. (100 HP @ 7000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mazda CX-9 should accelerate faster than 1978 Mazda RX-3.
Because 1978 Mazda RX-3 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 Mazda RX-3. 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 134 more torque (in Nm) than 1978 Mazda RX-3. (135 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2009 Mazda CX-9 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1978 Mazda RX-3.
Compare all specifications:
| 1978 Mazda RX-3 | 2009 Mazda CX-9 | |
| Make | Mazda | Mazda |
| Model | RX-3 | CX-9 |
| Year Released | 1978 | 2009 |
| Body Type | Coupe | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1963 cc | 3727 cc |
| Engine Type | dual-disk rotary | V |
| Horse Power | 100 HP | 268 HP |
| Engine RPM | 7000 RPM | 6250 RPM |
| Torque | 135 Nm | 269 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 4250 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4090 mm | 4600 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1600 mm | 1940 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1380 mm | 1730 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2320 mm | 2340 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 65 L | 76 L |
