2004 Ford Taurus vs. 2008 Mazda CX-7
To start off, 2008 Mazda CX-7 is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Ford Taurus. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Ford Taurus would be higher. At 2,983 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Ford Taurus is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2008 Mazda CX-7 (244 HP @ 5000 RPM) has 44 more horse power than 2004 Ford Taurus. (200 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2008 Mazda CX-7 should accelerate faster than 2004 Ford Taurus. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Ford Taurus weights approximately 171 kg more than 2008 Mazda CX-7.
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, 2008 Mazda CX-7 (350 Nm) has 69 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Ford Taurus. (281 Nm). This means 2008 Mazda CX-7 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Ford Taurus.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Ford Taurus | 2008 Mazda CX-7 | |
| Make | Ford | Mazda |
| Model | Taurus | CX-7 |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2008 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2983 cc | 2260 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 200 HP | 244 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5000 RPM |
| Torque | 281 Nm | 350 Nm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 9.5:1 |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Number of Seats | 6 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1503 kg | 1332 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5030 mm | 4680 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1880 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 1650 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2620 mm | 2760 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 8.7 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 11.8 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 10.2 L/100km | 12.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 69 L |
