2000 Daewoo Rezzo vs. 1982 Mazda 626
To start off, 2000 Daewoo Rezzo is newer by 18 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Mazda 626. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Mazda 626 would be higher. At 1,761 cc (4 cylinders), 2000 Daewoo Rezzo is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Daewoo Rezzo weights approximately 225 kg more than 1982 Mazda 626.
Because 1982 Mazda 626 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 1982 Mazda 626. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Daewoo Rezzo, 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. 1982 Mazda 626 has automatic transmission and 2000 Daewoo Rezzo has manual transmission. 2000 Daewoo Rezzo will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 1982 Mazda 626 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
2000 Daewoo Rezzo | 1982 Mazda 626 | |
Make | Daewoo | Mazda |
Model | Rezzo | 626 |
Year Released | 2000 | 1982 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1761 cc | 1586 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 97 HP | 0 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1270 kg | 1045 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4360 mm | 4310 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1670 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1590 mm | 1380 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2610 mm | 2520 mm |