2000 Ford Equator vs. 2004 Mazda 3
To start off, 2004 Mazda 3 is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Ford Equator. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Ford Equator would be higher. At 2,260 cc (4 cylinders), 2004 Mazda 3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Mazda 3 (160 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 32 more horse power than 2000 Ford Equator. (128 HP @ 5500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2004 Mazda 3 should accelerate faster than 2000 Ford Equator. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Mazda 3 weights approximately 74 kg more than 2000 Ford Equator. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2004 Mazda 3 (203 Nm) has 43 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Ford Equator. (160 Nm). This means 2004 Mazda 3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Ford Equator.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Ford Equator | 2004 Mazda 3 | |
| Make | Ford | Mazda |
| Model | Equator | 3 |
| Year Released | 2000 | 2004 |
| Body Type | Pickup | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1787 cc | 2260 cc |
| Horse Power | 128 HP | 160 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5500 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Torque | 160 Nm | 203 Nm |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1208 kg | 1282 kg |
| Wheelbase Size | 3260 mm | 2650 mm |
