2003 Mazda 6 vs. 2012 Opel Combo
To start off, 2012 Opel Combo is newer by 9 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 1,798 cc (4 cylinders), 2003 Mazda 6 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Mazda 6 (119 HP @ 5300 RPM) has 30 more horse power than 2012 Opel Combo. (89 HP @ 5600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2003 Mazda 6 should accelerate faster than 2012 Opel Combo.
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, 2003 Mazda 6 (168 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 42 more torque (in Nm) than 2012 Opel Combo. (126 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2003 Mazda 6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2012 Opel Combo.
Compare all specifications:
2003 Mazda 6 | 2012 Opel Combo | |
Make | Mazda | Opel |
Model | 6 | Combo |
Year Released | 2003 | 2012 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1798 cc | 1364 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 119 HP | 89 HP |
Engine RPM | 5300 RPM | 5600 RPM |
Torque | 168 Nm | 126 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 83.1 mm | 73.4 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 83.1 mm | 80.6 mm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 3 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4690 mm | 4330 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 1810 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1440 mm | 1690 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 2720 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 52 L |