1981 Mazda Cosmo vs. 2006 Mazda 3
To start off, 2006 Mazda 3 is newer by 25 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1981 Mazda Cosmo. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1981 Mazda Cosmo would be higher. At 2,292 cc (2 cylinders), 1981 Mazda Cosmo is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Mazda 3 weights approximately 90 kg more than 1981 Mazda Cosmo.
Because 1981 Mazda Cosmo 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 Cosmo. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Mazda 3, 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:
| 1981 Mazda Cosmo | 2006 Mazda 3 | |
| Make | Mazda | Mazda |
| Model | Cosmo | 3 |
| Year Released | 1981 | 2006 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2292 cc | 1598 cc |
| Horse Power | 120 HP | 0 HP |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1150 kg | 1240 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4670 mm | 4500 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1700 mm | 1760 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 1470 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2620 mm | 2650 mm |
