1982 Mazda Cosmo vs. 1967 Riley Kestrel

To start off, 1982 Mazda Cosmo is newer by 15 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1967 Riley Kestrel. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1967 Riley Kestrel would be higher. At 1,769 cc (4 cylinders), 1982 Mazda Cosmo is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1982 Mazda Cosmo (93 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 36 more horse power than 1967 Riley Kestrel. (57 HP @ 5250 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1982 Mazda Cosmo should accelerate faster than 1967 Riley Kestrel. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1982 Mazda Cosmo weights approximately 175 kg more than 1967 Riley Kestrel. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.

Because 1982 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 1982 Mazda Cosmo. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1967 Riley Kestrel, 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, 1982 Mazda Cosmo (149 Nm @ 3300 RPM) has 55 more torque (in Nm) than 1967 Riley Kestrel. (94 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 1982 Mazda Cosmo will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1967 Riley Kestrel.

Compare all specifications: