2005 Ford Falcon vs. 1977 Mazda RX-3
To start off, 2005 Ford Falcon is newer by 28 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1977 Mazda RX-3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1977 Mazda RX-3 would be higher. At 3,984 cc (6 cylinders), 2005 Ford Falcon is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Ford Falcon (200 HP @ 4900 RPM) has 100 more horse power than 1977 Mazda RX-3. (100 HP @ 7000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2005 Ford Falcon should accelerate faster than 1977 Mazda RX-3. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Ford Falcon weights approximately 729 kg more than 1977 Mazda RX-3. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front 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, 2005 Ford Falcon (357 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 222 more torque (in Nm) than 1977 Mazda RX-3. (135 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2005 Ford Falcon will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1977 Mazda RX-3.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Ford Falcon | 1977 Mazda RX-3 | |
Make | Ford | Mazda |
Model | Falcon | RX-3 |
Year Released | 2005 | 1977 |
Body Type | Station Wagon | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3984 cc | 1964 cc |
Engine Type | in-line | dual-disk rotary |
Horse Power | 200 HP | 100 HP |
Engine RPM | 4900 RPM | 7000 RPM |
Torque | 357 Nm | 135 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1581 kg | 852 kg |
Wheelbase Size | 2930 mm | 2320 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 70 L | 65 L |