2004 Mazda 6 vs. 2009 Subaru Outback
To start off, 2009 Subaru Outback is newer by 5 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 2,455 cc (4 cylinders), 2009 Subaru Outback is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, both vehicles can yield 168 horse power. So under normal driving conditions, the acceleration of both vehicles should be relatively similar.
Because 2009 Subaru Outback is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2004 Mazda 6. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Subaru Outback 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 (221 Nm) has 51 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Subaru Outback. (170 Nm). This means 2004 Mazda 6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Subaru Outback.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Mazda 6 | 2009 Subaru Outback | |
| Make | Mazda | Subaru |
| Model | 6 | Outback |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2009 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Station Wagon |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2262 cc | 2455 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | boxer |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 168 HP | 168 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 221 Nm | 170 Nm |
| Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 1750 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 7.4 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 9.8 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
