2002 Mazda 6 vs. 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass
To start off, 2002 Mazda 6 is newer by 26 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass would be higher. At 3,344 cc (6 cylinders), 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 Mazda 6 (164 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 4 more horse power than 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass. (160 HP @ 3600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2002 Mazda 6 should accelerate faster than 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass.
Because 2002 Mazda 6 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2002 Mazda 6 will offer significantly more control. 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, 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass (251 Nm) has 31 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 Mazda 6. (220 Nm). This means 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 Mazda 6.
Compare all specifications:
| 2002 Mazda 6 | 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass | |
| Make | Mazda | Oldsmobile |
| Model | 6 | Cutlass |
| Year Released | 2002 | 1976 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2261 cc | 3344 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 164 HP | 160 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 3600 RPM |
| Torque | 220 Nm | 251 Nm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 11.0:1 | 9.0:1 |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 4710 mm | 4840 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 1770 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1490 mm | 1380 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 2670 mm |
