2001 Mazda CU-X vs. 1952 Skoda 1200
To start off, 2001 Mazda CU-X is newer by 49 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1952 Skoda 1200. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1952 Skoda 1200 would be higher. At 1,970 cc, 2001 Mazda CU-X is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2001 Mazda CU-X (99 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 64 more horse power than 1952 Skoda 1200. (35 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2001 Mazda CU-X should accelerate faster than 1952 Skoda 1200. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2001 Mazda CU-X weights approximately 335 kg more than 1952 Skoda 1200. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 1952 Skoda 1200 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 1952 Skoda 1200. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2001 Mazda CU-X, 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 Mazda CU-X (240 Nm) has 165 more torque (in Nm) than 1952 Skoda 1200. (75 Nm). This means 2001 Mazda CU-X will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1952 Skoda 1200.
Compare all specifications:
2001 Mazda CU-X | 1952 Skoda 1200 | |
Make | Mazda | Skoda |
Model | CU-X | 1200 |
Year Released | 2001 | 1952 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1970 cc | 1221 cc |
Horse Power | 99 HP | 35 HP |
Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Torque | 240 Nm | 75 Nm |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Vehicle Weight | 1345 kg | 1010 kg |
Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 2690 mm |