2009 Mazda 6 vs. 1982 Mazda 626
To start off, 2009 Mazda 6 is newer by 27 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Mazda 626. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Mazda 626 would be higher. At 3,726 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Mazda 6 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2009 Mazda 6 weights approximately 80 kg more than 1982 Mazda 626.
Because 1982 Mazda 626 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 Mazda 626. 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. 2009 Mazda 6 has automatic transmission and 1982 Mazda 626 has manual transmission. 1982 Mazda 626 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2009 Mazda 6 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Mazda 6 | 1982 Mazda 626 | |
| Make | Mazda | Mazda |
| Model | 6 | 626 |
| Year Released | 2009 | 1982 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3726 cc | 1586 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 272 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1125 kg | 1045 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4930 mm | 4310 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1670 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1480 mm | 1380 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2800 mm | 2520 mm |
