2004 Rolls-Royce 100 vs. 2010 Mazda 6
To start off, 2010 Mazda 6 is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Rolls-Royce 100. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Rolls-Royce 100 would be higher. At 8,998 cc (16 cylinders), 2004 Rolls-Royce 100 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Rolls-Royce 100 weights approximately 1230 kg more than 2010 Mazda 6.
Because 2004 Rolls-Royce 100 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 Rolls-Royce 100. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Mazda 6, 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 Rolls-Royce 100 | 2010 Mazda 6 | |
Make | Rolls-Royce | Mazda |
Model | 100 | 6 |
Year Released | 2004 | 2010 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 8998 cc | 1798 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 16 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 118 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Automatic | 5-speed shiftable automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 2640 kg | 1410 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5680 mm | 4755 mm |
Vehicle Width | 2000 mm | 1795 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1570 mm | 1440 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3480 mm | 2789 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 80 L | 70 L |