2003 Mazda 6 vs. 2009 Volkswagen Caddy
To start off, 2009 Volkswagen Caddy is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Mazda 6. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Mazda 6 would be higher. At 1,896 cc (4 cylinders), 2009 Volkswagen Caddy is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, both vehicles can yield 104 horse power. So under normal driving conditions, the acceleration of both vehicles should be relatively similar. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2009 Volkswagen Caddy weights approximately 20 kg more than 2003 Mazda 6.
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, 2009 Volkswagen Caddy (250 Nm) has 10 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Mazda 6. (240 Nm). This means 2009 Volkswagen Caddy will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Mazda 6.
Compare all specifications:
2003 Mazda 6 | 2009 Volkswagen Caddy | |
Make | Mazda | Volkswagen |
Model | 6 | Caddy |
Year Released | 2003 | 2009 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1594 cc | 1896 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 104 HP | 104 HP |
Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 5000 RPM |
Torque | 240 Nm | 250 Nm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline - Premium | Diesel |
Acceleration 0-100mph | 11 seconds | 13.3 seconds |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1345 kg | 1365 kg |
Wheelbase Size | 2610 mm | 2690 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 7.2 L/100km | 6 L/100km |