1981 Mazda 626 vs. 2010 Mazda 6
To start off, 2010 Mazda 6 is newer by 29 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1981 Mazda 626. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1981 Mazda 626 would be higher. At 1,798 cc (4 cylinders), 2010 Mazda 6 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2010 Mazda 6 weights approximately 365 kg more than 1981 Mazda 626.
Because 1981 Mazda 626 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 1981 Mazda 626. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 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. 2010 Mazda 6 has automatic transmission and 1981 Mazda 626 has manual transmission. 1981 Mazda 626 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2010 Mazda 6 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 1981 Mazda 626 | 2010 Mazda 6 | |
| Make | Mazda | Mazda |
| Model | 626 | 6 |
| Year Released | 1981 | 2010 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1584 cc | 1798 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 118 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | 5-speed shiftable automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1045 kg | 1410 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4310 mm | 4755 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1670 mm | 1795 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1380 mm | 1440 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2520 mm | 2789 mm |
