2004 Mazda MX vs. 2000 Oldsmobile Cutlass
To start off, 2004 Mazda MX is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Oldsmobile Cutlass. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Oldsmobile Cutlass would be higher. At 3,135 cc (6 cylinders), 2000 Oldsmobile Cutlass is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Mazda MX (160 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 10 more horse power than 2000 Oldsmobile Cutlass. (150 HP @ 4800 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Mazda MX should accelerate faster than 2000 Oldsmobile Cutlass.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear wheel drive vehicles. 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, 2000 Oldsmobile Cutlass (249 Nm @ 3200 RPM) has 42 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Mazda MX. (207 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2000 Oldsmobile Cutlass will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Mazda MX.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Mazda MX | 2000 Oldsmobile Cutlass | |
| Make | Mazda | Oldsmobile |
| Model | MX | Cutlass |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2000 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2261 cc | 3135 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 160 HP | 150 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 4800 RPM |
| Torque | 207 Nm | 249 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 3200 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Vehicle Length | 4480 mm | 4850 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1750 mm | 1770 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1660 mm | 1440 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2760 mm | 2720 mm |
