2002 Ford Econovan vs. 1996 Mazda Sentia
To start off, 2002 Ford Econovan is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Mazda Sentia. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Mazda Sentia would be higher. At 2,952 cc (6 cylinders), 1996 Mazda Sentia is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1996 Mazda Sentia weights approximately 265 kg more than 2002 Ford Econovan.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front 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. 1996 Mazda Sentia has automatic transmission and 2002 Ford Econovan has manual transmission. 2002 Ford Econovan will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 1996 Mazda Sentia will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
2002 Ford Econovan | 1996 Mazda Sentia | |
Make | Ford | Mazda |
Model | Econovan | Sentia |
Year Released | 2002 | 1996 |
Body Type | Van | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1789 cc | 2952 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 90 HP | 0 HP |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1295 kg | 1560 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4290 mm | 4900 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1640 mm | 1800 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1870 mm | 1430 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2210 mm | 2860 mm |