2001 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 2004 Mazda 6
To start off, 2004 Mazda 6 is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2001 Chevrolet Camaro. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2001 Chevrolet Camaro would be higher. At 3,400 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 120 kg more than 2004 Mazda 6.
Because 2001 Chevrolet Camaro 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 2001 Chevrolet Camaro. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 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, 2001 Chevrolet Camaro (271 Nm) has 103 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Mazda 6. (168 Nm). This means 2001 Chevrolet Camaro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Mazda 6.
Compare all specifications:
2001 Chevrolet Camaro | 2004 Mazda 6 | |
Make | Chevrolet | Mazda |
Model | Camaro | 6 |
Year Released | 2001 | 2004 |
Body Type | Coupe | Station Wagon |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3400 cc | 1840 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 119 HP |
Torque | 271 Nm | 168 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1540 kg | 1420 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4910 mm | 4680 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1790 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1310 mm | 1490 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2570 mm | 2680 mm |