2000 BMW Z9 vs. 2003 Mazda 6
To start off, 2003 Mazda 6 is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 BMW Z9. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 BMW Z9 would be higher. At 4,398 cc (8 cylinders), 2000 BMW Z9 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 BMW Z9 (282 HP @ 5400 RPM) has 143 more horse power than 2003 Mazda 6. (139 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 BMW Z9 should accelerate faster than 2003 Mazda 6.
Because 2000 BMW Z9 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 2000 BMW Z9. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 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. Let's talk about torque, 2000 BMW Z9 (440 Nm @ 3600 RPM) has 259 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Mazda 6. (181 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2000 BMW Z9 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Mazda 6.
Compare all specifications:
2000 BMW Z9 | 2003 Mazda 6 | |
Make | BMW | Mazda |
Model | Z9 | 6 |
Year Released | 2000 | 2003 |
Body Type | Convertible | Station Wagon |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4398 cc | 1989 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 282 HP | 139 HP |
Engine RPM | 5400 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 440 Nm | 181 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3600 RPM | 4500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Length | 5010 mm | 4690 mm |
Vehicle Width | 2010 mm | 1790 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1360 mm | 1440 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3110 mm | 2680 mm |