2000 Ford Equator 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 Ford Equator. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Ford Equator would be higher. At 2,489 cc (4 cylinders), 2013 Mazda 6 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Mazda 6 (168 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 40 more horse power than 2000 Ford Equator. (128 HP @ 5500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Mazda 6 should accelerate faster than 2000 Ford Equator. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Mazda 6 weights approximately 291 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, 2013 Mazda 6 (226 Nm) has 66 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Ford Equator. (160 Nm). This means 2013 Mazda 6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Ford Equator. 2000 Ford Equator has automatic transmission and 2013 Mazda 6 has manual transmission. 2013 Mazda 6 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2000 Ford Equator will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Ford Equator | 2013 Mazda 6 | |
| Make | Ford | Mazda |
| Model | Equator | 6 |
| Year Released | 2000 | 2013 |
| Body Type | Pickup | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1787 cc | 2489 cc |
| Horse Power | 128 HP | 168 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5500 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 160 Nm | 226 Nm |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | 6-speed manual |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1208 kg | 1499 kg |
| Wheelbase Size | 3260 mm | 2790 mm |
