2004 Mazda 6 vs. 2010 Saab 03-Sep
To start off, 2010 Saab 03-Sep is newer by 6 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 2,262 cc (4 cylinders), 2004 Mazda 6 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Saab 03-Sep (207 HP @ 5300 RPM) has 39 more horse power than 2004 Mazda 6. (168 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Saab 03-Sep should accelerate faster than 2004 Mazda 6.
Because 2010 Saab 03-Sep is all wheel drive (AWD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2004 Mazda 6. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Saab 03-Sep 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, 2010 Saab 03-Sep (299 Nm) has 78 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Mazda 6. (221 Nm). This means 2010 Saab 03-Sep will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Mazda 6.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Mazda 6 | 2010 Saab 03-Sep | |
Make | Mazda | Saab |
Model | 6 | 03-Sep |
Year Released | 2004 | 2010 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2262 cc | 2000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 168 HP | 207 HP |
Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 5300 RPM |
Torque | 221 Nm | 299 Nm |
Drive Type | Front | AWD |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4750 mm | 4689 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 1801 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1529 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 2675 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 7.4 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 9.8 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 62 L |