2009 Mazda 3 vs. 1966 Triumph Vitesse
To start off, 2009 Mazda 3 is newer by 43 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Triumph Vitesse. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Triumph Vitesse would be higher. At 1,998 cc (6 cylinders), 1966 Triumph Vitesse is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1966 Triumph Vitesse (89 HP) has 6 more horse power than 2009 Mazda 3. (83 HP) In normal driving conditions, 1966 Triumph Vitesse should accelerate faster than 2009 Mazda 3.
Because 1966 Triumph Vitesse 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 1966 Triumph Vitesse. 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 | 1966 Triumph Vitesse | |
Make | Mazda | Triumph |
Model | 3 | Vitesse |
Year Released | 2009 | 1966 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1347 cc | 1998 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 83 HP | 89 HP |
Engine Bore Size | 76 mm | 74.7 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 76.5 mm | 76 mm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline - Premium | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4430 mm | 3890 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1530 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 55 L | 38 L |