1982 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 2010 Mazda 3
To start off, 2010 Mazda 3 is newer by 28 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Chevrolet Camaro. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Chevrolet Camaro would be higher. At 2,474 cc (6 cylinders), 1982 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Mazda 3 (148 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 59 more horse power than 1982 Chevrolet Camaro. (89 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Mazda 3 should accelerate faster than 1982 Chevrolet Camaro.
Because 1982 Chevrolet Camaro 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 Chevrolet Camaro. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 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. Let's talk about torque, 2010 Mazda 3 (183 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 4 more torque (in Nm) than 1982 Chevrolet Camaro. (179 Nm @ 2800 RPM). This means 2010 Mazda 3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1982 Chevrolet Camaro.
Compare all specifications:
1982 Chevrolet Camaro | 2010 Mazda 3 | |
Make | Chevrolet | Mazda |
Model | Camaro | 3 |
Year Released | 1982 | 2010 |
Body Type | Coupe | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2474 cc | 2000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 89 HP | 148 HP |
Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 6500 RPM |
Torque | 179 Nm | 183 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2800 RPM | 4500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4880 mm | 4590 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1755 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2639 mm |