2001 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 1982 Mazda 626
To start off, 2001 Chevrolet Camaro is newer by 19 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Mazda 626. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Mazda 626 would be higher. At 3,390 cc (6 cylinders), 2001 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2001 Chevrolet Camaro weights approximately 368 kg more than 1982 Mazda 626.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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. 1982 Mazda 626 has automatic transmission and 2001 Chevrolet Camaro has manual transmission. 2001 Chevrolet Camaro will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 1982 Mazda 626 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2001 Chevrolet Camaro | 1982 Mazda 626 | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Mazda |
| Model | Camaro | 626 |
| Year Released | 2001 | 1982 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3390 cc | 1586 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 160 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1413 kg | 1045 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4910 mm | 4310 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1670 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1310 mm | 1380 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2450 mm | 2520 mm |
