2009 Dodge Dakota vs. 2004 Mazda B3000
To start off, 2009 Dodge Dakota is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Mazda B3000. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Mazda B3000 would be higher. At 3,701 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Dodge Dakota is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Dodge Dakota (211 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 56 more horse power than 2004 Mazda B3000. (155 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Dodge Dakota should accelerate faster than 2004 Mazda B3000. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2009 Dodge Dakota weights approximately 181 kg more than 2004 Mazda B3000. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2009 Dodge Dakota (319 Nm) has 75 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Mazda B3000. (244 Nm). This means 2009 Dodge Dakota will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Mazda B3000.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Dodge Dakota | 2004 Mazda B3000 | |
| Make | Dodge | Mazda |
| Model | Dakota | B3000 |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2004 |
| Body Type | Pickup | Pickup |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3701 cc | 2966 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 211 HP | 155 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Torque | 319 Nm | 244 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 87.9 mm | 89 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 100 mm | 80 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.7:1 | 9.1:1 |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1691 kg | 1510 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5560 mm | 5160 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1830 mm | 1770 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1750 mm | 1650 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3340 mm | 3200 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 13.1 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 16.8 L/100km | 13.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 15.7 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 83 L | 74 L |
