2009 Ford E-350 vs. 2001 Mazda CU-X
To start off, 2009 Ford E-350 is newer by 8 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2001 Mazda CU-X. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2001 Mazda CU-X would be higher. At 5,408 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 Ford E-350 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Ford E-350 (255 HP @ 4500 RPM) has 156 more horse power than 2001 Mazda CU-X. (99 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Ford E-350 should accelerate faster than 2001 Mazda CU-X. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2001 Mazda CU-X weights approximately 375 kg more than 2009 Ford E-350.
Because 2009 Ford E-350 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 2009 Ford E-350. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2001 Mazda CU-X, 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. Let's talk about torque, 2009 Ford E-350 (475 Nm) has 235 more torque (in Nm) than 2001 Mazda CU-X. (240 Nm). This means 2009 Ford E-350 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2001 Mazda CU-X.
Compare all specifications:
2009 Ford E-350 | 2001 Mazda CU-X | |
Make | Ford | Mazda |
Model | E-350 | CU-X |
Year Released | 2009 | 2001 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5408 cc | 1970 cc |
Horse Power | 255 HP | 99 HP |
Engine RPM | 4500 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Torque | 475 Nm | 240 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Vehicle Weight | 970 kg | 1345 kg |
Wheelbase Size | 3510 mm | 2680 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 132 L | 80 L |