2000 Ford TS-50 vs. 2003 Mazda 6
To start off, 2003 Mazda 6 is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Ford TS-50. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Ford TS-50 would be higher. At 1,989 cc (8 cylinders), 2000 Ford TS-50 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Ford TS-50 (128 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 24 more horse power than 2003 Mazda 6. (104 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 Ford TS-50 should accelerate faster than 2003 Mazda 6. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Mazda 6 weights approximately 137 kg more than 2000 Ford TS-50.
Because 2000 Ford TS-50 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 TS-50. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Mazda 6, 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, 2003 Mazda 6 (240 Nm) has 65 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Ford TS-50. (175 Nm). This means 2003 Mazda 6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Ford TS-50.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Ford TS-50 | 2003 Mazda 6 | |
| Make | Ford | Mazda |
| Model | TS-50 | 6 |
| Year Released | 2000 | 2003 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1989 cc | 1594 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 128 HP | 104 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Torque | 175 Nm | 240 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Vehicle Weight | 1208 kg | 1345 kg |
| Wheelbase Size | 2760 mm | 2610 mm |
