2009 Mazda 2 vs. 1950 Riley RM A
To start off, 2009 Mazda 2 is newer by 59 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1950 Riley RM A. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1950 Riley RM A would be higher. At 1,498 cc (4 cylinders), 2009 Mazda 2 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1950 Riley RM A weights approximately 275 kg more than 2009 Mazda 2.
Because 1950 Riley RM A 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 1950 Riley RM A. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Mazda 2, 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:
| 2009 Mazda 2 | 1950 Riley RM A | |
| Make | Mazda | Riley |
| Model | 2 | RM A |
| Year Released | 2009 | 1950 |
| Engine Size | 1498 cc | 1496 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 102 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline - Premium | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 960 kg | 1235 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3890 mm | 4560 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1700 mm | 1620 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1480 mm | 1550 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2500 mm | 2870 mm |
