2009 Mazda 3 vs. 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass
To start off, 2009 Mazda 3 is newer by 27 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass would be higher. At 3,790 cc (6 cylinders), 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass weights approximately 295 kg more than 2009 Mazda 3.
Because 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass 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 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass. 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 | 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass | |
Make | Mazda | Oldsmobile |
Model | 3 | Cutlass |
Year Released | 2009 | 1982 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1595 cc | 3790 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 104 HP | 0 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline - Premium | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Vehicle Weight | 1185 kg | 1480 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 5530 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1830 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1390 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2650 mm | 2760 mm |