2009 Mazda 6 vs. 1978 Zastava 132
To start off, 2009 Mazda 6 is newer by 31 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1978 Zastava 132. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1978 Zastava 132 would be higher. At 2,487 cc (4 cylinders), 2009 Mazda 6 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Mazda 6 (168 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 62 more horse power than 1978 Zastava 132. (106 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mazda 6 should accelerate faster than 1978 Zastava 132.
Because 1978 Zastava 132 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 1978 Zastava 132. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Mazda 6, 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, 2009 Mazda 6 (167 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 25 more torque (in Nm) than 1978 Zastava 132. (142 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2009 Mazda 6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1978 Zastava 132.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Mazda 6 | 1978 Zastava 132 | |
| Make | Mazda | Zastava |
| Model | 6 | 132 |
| Year Released | 2009 | 1978 |
| Engine Size | 2487 cc | 1756 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 168 HP | 106 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 167 Nm | 142 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1650 mm |
