1990 Mazda 626 vs. 1962 Studebaker Sky Hawk
To start off, 1990 Mazda 626 is newer by 28 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1962 Studebaker Sky Hawk. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1962 Studebaker Sky Hawk would be higher. At 2,779 cc (6 cylinders), 1962 Studebaker Sky Hawk is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 1962 Studebaker Sky Hawk 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 1962 Studebaker Sky Hawk. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1990 Mazda 626, 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:
1990 Mazda 626 | 1962 Studebaker Sky Hawk | |
Make | Mazda | Studebaker |
Model | 626 | Sky Hawk |
Year Released | 1990 | 1962 |
Body Type | Station Wagon | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1789 cc | 2779 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 0 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4600 mm | 5150 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1700 mm | 1820 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1440 mm | 1530 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2980 mm |