2000 Chrysler ESX 3 vs. 1995 Mazda 626
To start off, 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1995 Mazda 626. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1995 Mazda 626 would be higher. At 1,840 cc (4 cylinders), 1995 Mazda 626 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, both vehicles can yield 74 horse power. So under normal driving conditions, the acceleration of both vehicles should be relatively similar. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 weights approximately 365 kg more than 1995 Mazda 626.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear 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 Chrysler ESX 3 (332 Nm) has 163 more torque (in Nm) than 1995 Mazda 626. (169 Nm). This means 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1995 Mazda 626.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 | 1995 Mazda 626 | |
| Make | Chrysler | Mazda |
| Model | ESX 3 | 626 |
| Year Released | 2000 | 1995 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Station Wagon |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1499 cc | 1840 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 74 HP | 74 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Torque | 332 Nm | 169 Nm |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1620 kg | 1255 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4910 mm | 4700 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1760 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1400 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3000 mm | 2620 mm |
