2003 Ford Ka vs. 2006 Mazda 3
To start off, 2006 Mazda 3 is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Ford Ka. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Ford Ka would be higher. At 1,999 cc, 2006 Mazda 3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Mazda 3 (150 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 81 more horse power than 2003 Ford Ka. (69 HP @ 5600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Mazda 3 should accelerate faster than 2003 Ford Ka.
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, 2006 Mazda 3 (183 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 77 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Ford Ka. (106 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2006 Mazda 3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Ford Ka.
Compare all specifications:
| 2003 Ford Ka | 2006 Mazda 3 | |
| Make | Ford | Mazda |
| Model | Ka | 3 |
| Year Released | 2003 | 2006 |
| Body Type | Hatchback | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1299 cc | 1999 cc |
| Horse Power | 69 HP | 150 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 6500 RPM |
| Torque | 106 Nm | 183 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 3 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 3630 mm | 4540 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1650 mm | 1760 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 1470 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2450 mm | 2650 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 6 L/100km | 7.6 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 40 L | 55 L |
