2000 Chrysler ESX 3 vs. 2013 Mazda 6
To start off, 2013 Mazda 6 is newer by 13 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Chrysler ESX 3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 would be higher. At 3,726 cc (6 cylinders), 2013 Mazda 6 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Mazda 6 (268 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 194 more horse power than 2000 Chrysler ESX 3. (74 HP @ 6400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Mazda 6 should accelerate faster than 2000 Chrysler ESX 3. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 weights approximately 121 kg more than 2013 Mazda 6.
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 106 more torque (in Nm) than 2013 Mazda 6. (226 Nm). This means 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2013 Mazda 6.
Compare all specifications:
2000 Chrysler ESX 3 | 2013 Mazda 6 | |
Make | Chrysler | Mazda |
Model | ESX 3 | 6 |
Year Released | 2000 | 2013 |
Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1499 cc | 3726 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 74 HP | 268 HP |
Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 6250 RPM |
Torque | 332 Nm | 226 Nm |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Transmission Type | Automatic | 6-speed shiftable automatic |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1620 kg | 1499 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4910 mm | 4940 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1840 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1470 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3000 mm | 2790 mm |