2006 Mazda 3 vs. 2000 TVR Tuscan
To start off, 2006 Mazda 3 is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 TVR Tuscan. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 TVR Tuscan would be higher. At 3,996 cc (6 cylinders), 2000 TVR Tuscan is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Mazda 3 weights approximately 65 kg more than 2000 TVR Tuscan.
Because 2000 TVR Tuscan 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 TVR Tuscan. 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 TVR Tuscan | |
| Make | Mazda | TVR |
| Model | 3 | Tuscan |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2000 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1598 cc | 3996 cc |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 390 HP |
| Engine Bore Size | 78 mm | 96 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 83.6 mm | 92 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 | 1175 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 4240 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1820 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1210 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2650 mm | 2370 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 8.9 L/100km | 13.5 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 55 L | 58 L |
