2004 GMC Safari vs. 2010 Mazda 3
To start off, 2010 Mazda 3 is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 GMC Safari. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 GMC Safari would be higher. At 4,294 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 GMC Safari is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 GMC Safari (191 HP) has 87 more horse power than 2010 Mazda 3. (104 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2004 GMC Safari should accelerate faster than 2010 Mazda 3.
Because 2004 GMC Safari is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2004 GMC Safari. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Mazda 3, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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, 2004 GMC Safari (339 Nm) has 194 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Mazda 3. (145 Nm). This means 2004 GMC Safari will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Mazda 3.
Compare all specifications:
2004 GMC Safari | 2010 Mazda 3 | |
Make | GMC | Mazda |
Model | Safari | 3 |
Year Released | 2004 | 2010 |
Body Type | Van | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4294 cc | 1560 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 191 HP | 104 HP |
Torque | 339 Nm | 145 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 3 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4830 mm | 4590 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1980 mm | 1755 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1910 mm | 1471 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2830 mm | 2639 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 102 L | 55 L |