2004 Mazda B2300 vs. 2010 Acura CSX
To start off, 2010 Acura CSX is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Mazda B2300. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Mazda B2300 would be higher. At 2,262 cc (4 cylinders), 2004 Mazda B2300 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Acura CSX (197 HP) has 54 more horse power than 2004 Mazda B2300. (143 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Acura CSX should accelerate faster than 2004 Mazda B2300. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Mazda B2300 weights approximately 130 kg more than 2010 Acura CSX.
Because 2004 Mazda B2300 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 Mazda B2300. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Acura CSX, 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Mazda B2300 | 2010 Acura CSX | |
| Make | Mazda | Acura |
| Model | B2300 | CSX |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Pickup | Sedan |
| 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 | 143 HP | 197 HP |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 3 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1443 kg | 1313 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5130 mm | 4544 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1770 mm | 1752 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1650 mm | 1435 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3200 mm | 2700 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 8.1 L/100km | 6.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 9.8 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |
