1982 Cadillac Brougham vs. 2004 Mazda MX
To start off, 2004 Mazda MX is newer by 22 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Cadillac Brougham. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Cadillac Brougham would be higher. At 5,031 cc (8 cylinders), 1982 Cadillac Brougham is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 1982 Cadillac Brougham 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 1982 Cadillac Brougham. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Mazda MX, 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:
| 1982 Cadillac Brougham | 2004 Mazda MX | |
| Make | Cadillac | Mazda |
| Model | Brougham | MX |
| Year Released | 1982 | 2004 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5031 cc | 2261 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 160 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Vehicle Length | 5630 mm | 4480 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1950 mm | 1750 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3090 mm | 2760 mm |
