2002 Mazda 626 vs. 1963 Triumph 2000
To start off, 2002 Mazda 626 is newer by 39 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Triumph 2000. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Triumph 2000 would be higher. At 1,998 cc (6 cylinders), 1963 Triumph 2000 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 Mazda 626 (100 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 11 more horse power than 1963 Triumph 2000. (89 HP @ 5000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2002 Mazda 626 should accelerate faster than 1963 Triumph 2000. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2002 Mazda 626 weights approximately 72 kg more than 1963 Triumph 2000. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 1963 Triumph 2000 (158 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 6 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 Mazda 626. (152 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 1963 Triumph 2000 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 Mazda 626.
Compare all specifications:
| 2002 Mazda 626 | 1963 Triumph 2000 | |
| Make | Mazda | Triumph |
| Model | 626 | 2000 |
| Year Released | 2002 | 1963 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1840 cc | 1998 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 100 HP | 89 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5500 RPM | 5000 RPM |
| Torque | 152 Nm | 158 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 3000 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 80 mm | 74.8 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 88 mm | 76 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 8.6:1 | 9.3:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1242 kg | 1170 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4680 mm | 4420 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1660 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1490 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 2700 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 64 L |
