2004 Mazda 6 vs. 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass
To start off, 2004 Mazda 6 is newer by 28 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass would be higher. At 3,344 cc (6 cylinders), 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Mazda 6 (220 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 60 more horse power than 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass. (160 HP @ 3600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Mazda 6 should accelerate faster than 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass.
Because 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass 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 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Mazda 6, 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 Mazda 6 (257 Nm) has 6 more torque (in Nm) than 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass. (251 Nm). This means 2004 Mazda 6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Mazda 6 | 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass | |
Make | Mazda | Oldsmobile |
Model | 6 | Cutlass |
Year Released | 2004 | 1976 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2966 cc | 3344 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 220 HP | 160 HP |
Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 3600 RPM |
Torque | 257 Nm | 251 Nm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 9.0:1 |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Vehicle Length | 4780 mm | 4840 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 1770 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1380 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 2670 mm |