2005 Ford E-250 vs. 2013 Mazda MX-5 MIATA
To start off, 2013 Mazda MX-5 MIATA is newer by 8 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Ford E-250. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Ford E-250 would be higher. At 4,605 cc (8 cylinders), 2005 Ford E-250 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Ford E-250 (225 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 60 more horse power than 2013 Mazda MX-5 MIATA. (165 HP @ 7000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2005 Ford E-250 should accelerate faster than 2013 Mazda MX-5 MIATA. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Ford E-250 weights approximately 1122 kg more than 2013 Mazda MX-5 MIATA. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2005 Ford E-250 (388 Nm) has 198 more torque (in Nm) than 2013 Mazda MX-5 MIATA. (190 Nm). This means 2005 Ford E-250 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2013 Mazda MX-5 MIATA.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Ford E-250 | 2013 Mazda MX-5 MIATA | |
| Make | Ford | Mazda |
| Model | E-250 | MX-5 MIATA |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2013 |
| Body Type | Van | Convertible |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4605 cc | 1999 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 225 HP | 165 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 7000 RPM |
| Torque | 388 Nm | 190 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 90 mm | 87 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 90 mm | 83 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.0:1 | 10.8:1 |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Doors | 3 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 2304 kg | 1182 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5390 mm | 4032 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2020 mm | 1720 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 2120 mm | 1255 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3510 mm | 2330 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 12.4 L/100km | 7.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 15.7 L/100km | 9.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 132 L | 48 L |
