2003 Mazda Roadster vs. 1965 Triumph 2000
To start off, 2003 Mazda Roadster is newer by 38 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 Triumph 2000. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 Triumph 2000 would be higher. At 1,997 cc (6 cylinders), 1965 Triumph 2000 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Mazda Roadster (157 HP @ 7000 RPM) has 68 more horse power than 1965 Triumph 2000. (89 HP @ 5000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2003 Mazda Roadster should accelerate faster than 1965 Triumph 2000. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1965 Triumph 2000 weights approximately 110 kg more than 2003 Mazda Roadster.
Let's talk about torque, 2003 Mazda Roadster (170 Nm @ 5500 RPM) has 12 more torque (in Nm) than 1965 Triumph 2000. (158 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2003 Mazda Roadster will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1965 Triumph 2000.
Compare all specifications:
| 2003 Mazda Roadster | 1965 Triumph 2000 | |
| Make | Mazda | Triumph |
| Model | Roadster | 2000 |
| Year Released | 2003 | 1965 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1839 cc | 1997 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 157 HP | 89 HP |
| Engine RPM | 7000 RPM | 5000 RPM |
| Torque | 170 Nm | 158 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 5500 RPM | 3000 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 83 mm | 74.7 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 85 mm | 76 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.5:1 | 9.3:1 |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1060 kg | 1170 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3960 mm | 4420 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1690 mm | 1660 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1240 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2370 mm | 2700 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 48 L | 64 L |
