2004 Mazda 6 vs. 2005 MCC Crossblade

To start off, 2005 MCC Crossblade is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Mazda 6. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Mazda 6 would be higher. At 2,261 cc (4 cylinders), 2004 Mazda 6 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Mazda 6 (160 HP) has 90 more horse power than 2005 MCC Crossblade. (70 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Mazda 6 should accelerate faster than 2005 MCC Crossblade. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Mazda 6 weights approximately 861 kg more than 2005 MCC Crossblade. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.

Because 2004 Mazda 6 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2005 MCC Crossblade. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Mazda 6 will offer significantly more control. 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 (205 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 103 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 MCC Crossblade. (102 Nm @ 3210 RPM). This means 2004 Mazda 6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 MCC Crossblade. 2004 Mazda 6 has automatic transmission and 2005 MCC Crossblade has manual transmission. 2005 MCC Crossblade will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2004 Mazda 6 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.

Compare all specifications: