2000 Ford Falcon 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 Falcon. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Ford Falcon would be higher. At 4,942 cc (8 cylinders), 2000 Ford Falcon is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Ford Falcon (268 HP @ 5000 RPM) has 108 more horse power than 2004 Mazda 3. (160 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 Ford Falcon should accelerate faster than 2004 Mazda 3. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Ford Falcon weights approximately 16 kg more than 2004 Mazda 3. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2000 Ford Falcon 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 2000 Ford Falcon. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Mazda 3, 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. Let's talk about torque, 2000 Ford Falcon (420 Nm) has 217 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Mazda 3. (203 Nm). This means 2000 Ford Falcon will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Mazda 3.
Compare all specifications:
2000 Ford Falcon | 2004 Mazda 3 | |
Make | Ford | Mazda |
Model | Falcon | 3 |
Year Released | 2000 | 2004 |
Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4942 cc | 2260 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 268 HP | 160 HP |
Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Torque | 420 Nm | 203 Nm |
Engine Bore Size | 101.6 mm | 87 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 76.2 mm | 94 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 9.1:1 | 9.7:1 |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1298 kg | 1282 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4910 mm | 4550 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1880 mm | 1760 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1440 mm | 1470 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2800 mm | 2650 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 55 L |