2000 Ford Artic vs. 1960 Mazda R 360
To start off, 2000 Ford Artic is newer by 40 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1960 Mazda R 360. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1960 Mazda R 360 would be higher. At 3,998 cc (6 cylinders), 2000 Ford Artic is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Ford Artic (128 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 112 more horse power than 1960 Mazda R 360. (16 HP @ 5300 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 Ford Artic should accelerate faster than 1960 Mazda R 360. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Ford Artic weights approximately 918 kg more than 1960 Mazda R 360. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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 Ford Artic (325 Nm) has 303 more torque (in Nm) than 1960 Mazda R 360. (22 Nm). This means 2000 Ford Artic will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1960 Mazda R 360.
Compare all specifications:
2000 Ford Artic | 1960 Mazda R 360 | |
Make | Ford | Mazda |
Model | Artic | R 360 |
Year Released | 2000 | 1960 |
Engine Size | 3998 cc | 355 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 2 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Horse Power | 128 HP | 16 HP |
Engine RPM | 6250 RPM | 5300 RPM |
Torque | 325 Nm | 22 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1298 kg | 380 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5240 mm | 2990 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1830 mm | 1300 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1790 mm | 1300 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3200 mm | 1770 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 55 L |