2009 Chevrolet Equinox vs. 2003 Mazda 6
To start off, 2009 Chevrolet Equinox is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Mazda 6. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Mazda 6 would be higher. At 3,425 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Chevrolet Equinox is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Chevrolet Equinox (185 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 46 more horse power than 2003 Mazda 6. (139 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Chevrolet Equinox should accelerate faster than 2003 Mazda 6. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Mazda 6 weights approximately 89 kg more than 2009 Chevrolet Equinox.
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, 2009 Chevrolet Equinox (285 Nm @ 3800 RPM) has 104 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Mazda 6. (181 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2009 Chevrolet Equinox will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Mazda 6.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Chevrolet Equinox | 2003 Mazda 6 | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Mazda |
| Model | Equinox | 6 |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2003 |
| Body Type | SUV | Station Wagon |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3425 cc | 1998 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 185 HP | 139 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 285 Nm | 181 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3800 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 11.0:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1261 kg | 1350 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4800 mm | 4710 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1820 mm | 1790 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1710 mm | 1490 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2860 mm | 2610 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.8 L/100km | 8.5 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 76 L | 64 L |
