2002 Daewoo Evanda vs. 2003 Mazda 6
To start off, 2003 Mazda 6 is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Daewoo Evanda. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Daewoo Evanda would be higher. At 1,998 cc (4 cylinders), 2002 Daewoo Evanda is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 Daewoo Evanda (131 HP @ 5400 RPM) has 27 more horse power than 2003 Mazda 6. (104 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2002 Daewoo Evanda should accelerate faster than 2003 Mazda 6. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2002 Daewoo Evanda weights approximately 77 kg more than 2003 Mazda 6. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear 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. Let's talk about torque, 2003 Mazda 6 (240 Nm) has 58 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 Daewoo Evanda. (182 Nm). This means 2003 Mazda 6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 Daewoo Evanda.
Compare all specifications:
2002 Daewoo Evanda | 2003 Mazda 6 | |
Make | Daewoo | Mazda |
Model | Evanda | 6 |
Year Released | 2002 | 2003 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1998 cc | 1594 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 131 HP | 104 HP |
Engine RPM | 5400 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Torque | 182 Nm | 240 Nm |
Top Speed | 199 km/hour | 185 km/hour |
Acceleration 0-100mph | 9.8 seconds | 11 seconds |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1422 kg | 1345 kg |
Wheelbase Size | 2710 mm | 2610 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 8.8 L/100km | 7.2 L/100km |