2004 Ford E-350 vs. 1978 Mazda Cosmo
To start off, 2004 Ford E-350 is newer by 26 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1978 Mazda Cosmo. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1978 Mazda Cosmo would be higher. At 5,408 cc (8 cylinders), 2004 Ford E-350 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Ford E-350 (255 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 162 more horse power than 1978 Mazda Cosmo. (93 HP @ 5500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Ford E-350 should accelerate faster than 1978 Mazda Cosmo. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Ford E-350 weights approximately 1330 kg more than 1978 Mazda Cosmo. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2004 Ford E-350 (475 Nm) has 325 more torque (in Nm) than 1978 Mazda Cosmo. (150 Nm). This means 2004 Ford E-350 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1978 Mazda Cosmo.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Ford E-350 | 1978 Mazda Cosmo | |
Make | Ford | Mazda |
Model | E-350 | Cosmo |
Year Released | 2004 | 1978 |
Body Type | Van | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5408 cc | 1769 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 255 HP | 93 HP |
Engine RPM | 6250 RPM | 5500 RPM |
Torque | 475 Nm | 150 Nm |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 3 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 2422 kg | 1092 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5390 mm | 4480 mm |
Vehicle Width | 2020 mm | 1690 mm |
Vehicle Height | 2120 mm | 1340 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3510 mm | 2520 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 132 L | 65 L |