2009 Mazda 3 vs. 2004 Pontiac GTO
To start off, 2009 Mazda 3 is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Pontiac GTO. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Pontiac GTO would be higher. At 5,669 cc (8 cylinders), 2004 Pontiac GTO is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Pontiac GTO (350 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 242 more horse power than 2009 Mazda 3. (108 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2004 Pontiac GTO should accelerate faster than 2009 Mazda 3. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Pontiac GTO weights approximately 430 kg more than 2009 Mazda 3. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2004 Pontiac GTO 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 2004 Pontiac GTO. 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. Let's talk about torque, 2004 Pontiac GTO (495 Nm) has 255 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Mazda 3. (240 Nm). This means 2004 Pontiac GTO will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Mazda 3.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Mazda 3 | 2004 Pontiac GTO | |
| Make | Mazda | Pontiac |
| Model | 3 | GTO |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2004 |
| Body Type | Hatchback | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1560 cc | 5669 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 108 HP | 350 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 5200 RPM |
| Torque | 240 Nm | 495 Nm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 18.3:1 | 10.1:1 |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1260 kg | 1690 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4430 mm | 4830 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1850 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1400 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2650 mm | 2720 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 5 L/100km | 13.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 55 L | 68 L |
