2001 Mazda CU-X vs. 1982 Reliant Scimitar

To start off, 2001 Mazda CU-X is newer by 19 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Reliant Scimitar. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Reliant Scimitar would be higher. At 2,792 cc (6 cylinders), 1982 Reliant Scimitar is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1982 Reliant Scimitar (135 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 36 more horse power than 2001 Mazda CU-X. (99 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1982 Reliant Scimitar should accelerate faster than 2001 Mazda CU-X. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2001 Mazda CU-X weights approximately 80 kg more than 1982 Reliant Scimitar.

Because 1982 Reliant Scimitar 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 1982 Reliant Scimitar. 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 34 more torque (in Nm) than 1982 Reliant Scimitar. (206 Nm). This means 2001 Mazda CU-X will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1982 Reliant Scimitar. 2001 Mazda CU-X has automatic transmission and 1982 Reliant Scimitar has manual transmission. 1982 Reliant Scimitar will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2001 Mazda CU-X will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.

Compare all specifications: