1996 Mazda Sentia vs. 2002 MCC Smart
To start off, 2002 MCC Smart is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Mazda Sentia. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Mazda Sentia would be higher. At 2,952 cc (6 cylinders), 1996 Mazda Sentia is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1996 Mazda Sentia weights approximately 810 kg more than 2002 MCC Smart.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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. 1996 Mazda Sentia has automatic transmission and 2002 MCC Smart has manual transmission. 2002 MCC Smart will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 1996 Mazda Sentia will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
1996 Mazda Sentia | 2002 MCC Smart | |
Make | Mazda | MCC |
Model | Sentia | Smart |
Year Released | 1996 | 2002 |
Body Type | Sedan | Convertible |
Engine Position | Front | Rear |
Engine Size | 2952 cc | 698 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 80 HP |
Engine Bore Size | 90 mm | 66.5 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 77.4 mm | 67 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 9.5:1 | 9.0:1 |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1600 kg | 790 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4900 mm | 3430 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1620 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1200 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2860 mm | 2370 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 70 L | 35 L |