2000 Ford 24.7 vs. 1980 Mazda 626
To start off, 2000 Ford 24.7 is newer by 20 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1980 Mazda 626. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1980 Mazda 626 would be higher. At 1,999 cc (4 cylinders), 2000 Ford 24.7 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Ford 24.7 weights approximately 163 kg more than 1980 Mazda 626.
Because 1980 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 1980 Mazda 626. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Ford 24.7, 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. 2000 Ford 24.7 has automatic transmission and 1980 Mazda 626 has manual transmission. 1980 Mazda 626 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2000 Ford 24.7 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Ford 24.7 | 1980 Mazda 626 | |
| Make | Ford | Mazda |
| Model | 24.7 | 626 |
| Year Released | 2000 | 1980 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1999 cc | 1586 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 128 HP | 0 HP |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1208 kg | 1045 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4530 mm | 4310 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1380 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2520 mm |
