2000 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 1973 Mazda RX-3
To start off, 2000 Chevrolet Camaro is newer by 27 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1973 Mazda RX-3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1973 Mazda RX-3 would be higher. At 5,670 cc (8 cylinders), 2000 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Chevrolet Camaro weights approximately 688 kg more than 1973 Mazda RX-3.
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. Let's talk about torque, 2000 Chevrolet Camaro (468 Nm) has 333 more torque (in Nm) than 1973 Mazda RX-3. (135 Nm). This means 2000 Chevrolet Camaro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1973 Mazda RX-3.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Chevrolet Camaro | 1973 Mazda RX-3 | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Mazda |
| Model | Camaro | RX-3 |
| Year Released | 2000 | 1973 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5670 cc | 1964 cc |
| Engine Type | V | dual-disk rotary |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 100 HP |
| Torque | 468 Nm | 135 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1540 kg | 852 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4910 mm | 4090 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1600 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1330 mm | 1380 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2570 mm | 2320 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 57 L | 65 L |
