2000 Ford TS-50 vs. 2012 Mazda 6
To start off, 2012 Mazda 6 is newer by 12 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 2,183 cc (4 cylinders), 2012 Mazda 6 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Ford TS-50 (128 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 1 more horse power than 2012 Mazda 6. (127 HP @ 3500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 Ford TS-50 should accelerate faster than 2012 Mazda 6. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2012 Mazda 6 weights approximately 342 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, 2012 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, 2012 Mazda 6 (340 Nm) has 165 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Ford TS-50. (175 Nm). This means 2012 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 | 2012 Mazda 6 | |
Make | Ford | Mazda |
Model | TS-50 | 6 |
Year Released | 2000 | 2012 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1989 cc | 2183 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 128 HP | 127 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 3500 RPM |
Torque | 175 Nm | 340 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Automatic | 5-speed shiftable automatic |
Vehicle Weight | 1208 kg | 1550 kg |
Wheelbase Size | 2760 mm | 2789 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 132 L | 70 L |