2005 Mazda 6 vs. 2010 Ford E-350
To start off, 2010 Ford E-350 is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Mazda 6. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Mazda 6 would be higher. At 5,400 cc (4 cylinders), 2010 Ford E-350 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Ford E-350 (171 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 11 more horse power than 2005 Mazda 6. (160 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Ford E-350 should accelerate faster than 2005 Mazda 6. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2010 Ford E-350 weights approximately 89 kg more than 2005 Mazda 6. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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, 2010 Ford E-350 (232 Nm) has 22 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Mazda 6. (210 Nm). This means 2010 Ford E-350 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Mazda 6.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Mazda 6 | 2010 Ford E-350 | |
| Make | Mazda | Ford |
| Model | 6 | E-350 |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Van |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2261 cc | 5400 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 160 HP | 171 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 210 Nm | 232 Nm |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Vehicle Weight | 1407 kg | 1496 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4750 mm | 4437 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 1806 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1725 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 2619 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 7.6 L/100km | 8.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 10.2 L/100km | 10.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 62 L |
