2000 Ford TS-50 vs. 2008 Mazda 3
To start off, 2008 Mazda 3 is newer by 8 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 2,261 cc, 2008 Mazda 3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2008 Mazda 3 (257 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 129 more horse power than 2000 Ford TS-50. (128 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2008 Mazda 3 should accelerate faster 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, 2008 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, 2008 Mazda 3 (380 Nm) has 205 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Ford TS-50. (175 Nm). This means 2008 Mazda 3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Ford TS-50. 2000 Ford TS-50 has automatic transmission and 2008 Mazda 3 has manual transmission. 2008 Mazda 3 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2000 Ford TS-50 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
2000 Ford TS-50 | 2008 Mazda 3 | |
Make | Ford | Mazda |
Model | TS-50 | 3 |
Year Released | 2000 | 2008 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1989 cc | 2261 cc |
Horse Power | 128 HP | 257 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5500 RPM |
Torque | 175 Nm | 380 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
Wheelbase Size | 2760 mm | 2650 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 132 L | 55 L |