1993 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 2004 Mazda 3
To start off, 2004 Mazda 3 is newer by 11 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1993 Chevrolet Camaro. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1993 Chevrolet Camaro would be higher. At 3,392 cc (6 cylinders), 1993 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Mazda 3 (160 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 2 more horse power than 1993 Chevrolet Camaro. (158 HP @ 4600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2004 Mazda 3 should accelerate faster than 1993 Chevrolet Camaro. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1993 Chevrolet Camaro weights approximately 131 kg more than 2004 Mazda 3.
Because 1993 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 1993 Chevrolet Camaro. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 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, 1993 Chevrolet Camaro (271 Nm) has 68 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Mazda 3. (203 Nm). This means 1993 Chevrolet Camaro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Mazda 3.
Compare all specifications:
| 1993 Chevrolet Camaro | 2004 Mazda 3 | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Mazda |
| Model | Camaro | 3 |
| Year Released | 1993 | 2004 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3392 cc | 2260 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 158 HP | 160 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Torque | 271 Nm | 203 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 92 mm | 87 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 84 mm | 94 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.0:1 | 9.7:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1413 kg | 1282 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4910 mm | 4550 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1760 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1310 mm | 1470 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2450 mm | 2650 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 14 L/100km | 8.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 55 L |
