2002 Cadillac XLR vs. 1990 Mazda 626
To start off, 2002 Cadillac XLR is newer by 12 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1990 Mazda 626. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1990 Mazda 626 would be higher. At 4,570 cc (8 cylinders), 2002 Cadillac XLR is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 2002 Cadillac XLR 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 2002 Cadillac XLR. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1990 Mazda 626, 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. 2002 Cadillac XLR has automatic transmission and 1990 Mazda 626 has manual transmission. 1990 Mazda 626 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2002 Cadillac XLR will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2002 Cadillac XLR | 1990 Mazda 626 | |
| Make | Cadillac | Mazda |
| Model | XLR | 626 |
| Year Released | 2002 | 1990 |
| Body Type | Convertible | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4570 cc | 1998 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 3 valves |
| Horse Power | 316 HP | 0 HP |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4520 mm | 4460 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1840 mm | 1700 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1290 mm | 1370 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2690 mm | 2520 mm |
