2006 Mazda 3 vs. 2000 Mercedes-Benz SL
To start off, 2006 Mazda 3 is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Mercedes-Benz SL. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Mercedes-Benz SL would be higher. At 3,199 cc (6 cylinders), 2000 Mercedes-Benz SL is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Mercedes-Benz SL weights approximately 515 kg more than 2006 Mazda 3.
Because 2000 Mercedes-Benz SL 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 2000 Mercedes-Benz SL. 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 | 2000 Mercedes-Benz SL | |
Make | Mazda | Mercedes-Benz |
Model | 3 | SL |
Year Released | 2006 | 2000 |
Body Type | Sedan | Convertible |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1598 cc | 3199 cc |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 3 valves |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 217 HP |
Engine Bore Size | 78 mm | 89.9 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 83.6 mm | 84 mm |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1240 kg | 1755 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 4470 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1820 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1300 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2650 mm | 2520 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 55 L | 80 L |