2009 Mazda 3 vs. 1953 Riley RM A
To start off, 2009 Mazda 3 is newer by 56 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1953 Riley RM A. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1953 Riley RM A would be higher. At 1,598 cc, 2009 Mazda 3 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1953 Riley RM A weights approximately 53 kg more than 2009 Mazda 3.
Because 1953 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 1953 Riley RM A. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 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:
2009 Mazda 3 | 1953 Riley RM A | |
Make | Mazda | Riley |
Model | 3 | RM A |
Year Released | 2009 | 1953 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1598 cc | 1496 cc |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 104 HP | 0 HP |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1182 kg | 1235 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4550 mm | 4560 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1620 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1550 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2650 mm | 2870 mm |