1983 Lotus Excel vs. 2006 Mazda 3
To start off, 2006 Mazda 3 is newer by 23 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1983 Lotus Excel. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1983 Lotus Excel would be higher. At 2,174 cc (4 cylinders), 1983 Lotus Excel is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1983 Lotus Excel (160 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 10 more horse power than 2006 Mazda 3. (150 HP @ 6500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1983 Lotus Excel should accelerate faster than 2006 Mazda 3.
Because 1983 Lotus Excel 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 1983 Lotus Excel. 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. Let's talk about torque, 1983 Lotus Excel (218 Nm @ 5250 RPM) has 35 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Mazda 3. (183 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 1983 Lotus Excel will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Mazda 3.
Compare all specifications:
1983 Lotus Excel | 2006 Mazda 3 | |
Make | Lotus | Mazda |
Model | Excel | 3 |
Year Released | 1983 | 2006 |
Body Type | Coupe | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2174 cc | 1999 cc |
Horse Power | 160 HP | 150 HP |
Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 6500 RPM |
Torque | 218 Nm | 183 Nm |
Torque RPM | 5250 RPM | 4500 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4380 mm | 4540 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1820 mm | 1760 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1020 mm | 1470 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2520 mm | 2650 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 9.1 L/100km | 7.6 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 31 L | 55 L |