2006 Mazda 3 vs. 1963 Triumph Vitesse
To start off, 2006 Mazda 3 is newer by 43 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Triumph Vitesse. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Triumph Vitesse would be higher. At 1,598 cc, 2006 Mazda 3 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Mazda 3 weights approximately 360 kg more than 1963 Triumph Vitesse.
Because 1963 Triumph Vitesse 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 1963 Triumph Vitesse. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Mazda 3, 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:
| 2006 Mazda 3 | 1963 Triumph Vitesse | |
| Make | Mazda | Triumph |
| Model | 3 | Vitesse |
| Year Released | 2006 | 1963 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1598 cc | 1596 cc |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 70 HP |
| Engine Bore Size | 78 mm | 66.8 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 83.6 mm | 76 mm |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1240 kg | 880 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 3890 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1530 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1340 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2650 mm | 2270 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 55 L | 40 L |
