2000 BMW Z9 vs. 2010 Mazda 3
To start off, 2010 Mazda 3 is newer by 10 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 169 more horse power than 2010 Mazda 3. (113 HP @ 3600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 BMW Z9 should accelerate faster than 2010 Mazda 3.
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, 2010 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, 2000 BMW Z9 (440 Nm @ 3600 RPM) has 170 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Mazda 3. (270 Nm @ 1750 RPM). This means 2000 BMW Z9 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Mazda 3.
Compare all specifications:
2000 BMW Z9 | 2010 Mazda 3 | |
Make | BMW | Mazda |
Model | Z9 | 3 |
Year Released | 2000 | 2010 |
Body Type | Convertible | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4398 cc | 1560 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 282 HP | 113 HP |
Engine RPM | 5400 RPM | 3600 RPM |
Torque | 440 Nm | 270 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3600 RPM | 1750 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | 5-speed manual |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Length | 5010 mm | 4590 mm |
Vehicle Width | 2010 mm | 1755 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1360 mm | 1471 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3110 mm | 2639 mm |