2004 Mazda B4000 vs. 2013 Cadillac ATS
To start off, 2013 Cadillac ATS is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Mazda B4000. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Mazda B4000 would be higher. At 4,029 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Mazda B4000 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Cadillac ATS (268 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 61 more horse power than 2004 Mazda B4000. (207 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Cadillac ATS should accelerate faster than 2004 Mazda B4000. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Mazda B4000 weights approximately 18 kg more than 2013 Cadillac ATS.
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, 2013 Cadillac ATS (353 Nm) has 30 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Mazda B4000. (323 Nm). This means 2013 Cadillac ATS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Mazda B4000.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Mazda B4000 | 2013 Cadillac ATS | |
| Make | Mazda | Cadillac |
| Model | B4000 | ATS |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2013 |
| Body Type | Pickup | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4029 cc | 2000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 207 HP | 268 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Torque | 323 Nm | 353 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 100 mm | 86 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 85 mm | 86 mm |
| Drive Type | 4WD | AWD |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1548 kg | 1530 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5160 mm | 4643 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 1805 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1720 mm | 1421 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3200 mm | 2775 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 10.2 L/100km | 6.3 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 9.9 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 74 L | 61 L |
