1981 Mazda 626 vs. 2012 Chevrolet Orlando
To start off, 2012 Chevrolet Orlando is newer by 31 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 1,998 cc (4 cylinders), 2012 Chevrolet Orlando is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2012 Chevrolet Orlando weights approximately 620 kg more than 1981 Mazda 626.
Because 2012 Chevrolet Orlando is all wheel drive (AWD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1981 Mazda 626. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 Chevrolet Orlando will offer significantly more control. 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. 2012 Chevrolet Orlando 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. 2012 Chevrolet Orlando will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 1981 Mazda 626 | 2012 Chevrolet Orlando | |
| Make | Mazda | Chevrolet |
| Model | 626 | Orlando |
| Year Released | 1981 | 2012 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1584 cc | 1998 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 128 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Drive Type | Rear | AWD |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1045 kg | 1665 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4310 mm | 4652 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1670 mm | 1836 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1380 mm | 1633 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2520 mm | 2760 mm |
