2009 Mazda 3 vs. 1986 Ford Aerostar
To start off, 2009 Mazda 3 is newer by 23 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1986 Ford Aerostar. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1986 Ford Aerostar would be higher. At 2,792 cc (6 cylinders), 1986 Ford Aerostar is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Mazda 3 (104 HP) has 5 more horse power than 1986 Ford Aerostar. (99 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mazda 3 should accelerate faster than 1986 Ford Aerostar. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1986 Ford Aerostar weights approximately 218 kg more than 2009 Mazda 3.
Because 1986 Ford Aerostar 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 1986 Ford Aerostar. 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 | 1986 Ford Aerostar | |
Make | Mazda | Ford |
Model | 3 | Aerostar |
Year Released | 2009 | 1986 |
Body Type | Hatchback | Minivan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1598 cc | 2792 cc |
Horse Power | 104 HP | 99 HP |
Engine Bore Size | 78 mm | 93 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 83.6 mm | 68.5 mm |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1192 kg | 1410 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4430 mm | 4450 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1830 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1860 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2650 mm | 3030 mm |