1986 Caterham 1700 vs. 2005 Mazda 6
To start off, 2005 Mazda 6 is newer by 19 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1986 Caterham 1700. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1986 Caterham 1700 would be higher. At 1,798 cc (4 cylinders), 2005 Mazda 6 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1986 Caterham 1700 (168 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 49 more horse power than 2005 Mazda 6. (119 HP @ 5300 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1986 Caterham 1700 should accelerate faster than 2005 Mazda 6.
Because 1986 Caterham 1700 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 1986 Caterham 1700. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 Mazda 6, 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:
| 1986 Caterham 1700 | 2005 Mazda 6 | |
| Make | Caterham | Mazda |
| Model | 1700 | 6 |
| Year Released | 1986 | 2005 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1692 cc | 1798 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 168 HP | 119 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 5300 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 11.0:1 | 11.0:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 3390 mm | 4710 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1590 mm | 1790 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1050 mm | 1440 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2260 mm | 2680 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 36 L | 64 L |
