2001 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 2000 Mazda 626
To start off, 2001 Chevrolet Camaro is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Mazda 626. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Mazda 626 would be higher. At 5,698 cc (8 cylinders), 2001 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2001 Chevrolet Camaro weights approximately 300 kg more than 2000 Mazda 626.
Because 2001 Chevrolet Camaro 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 2001 Chevrolet Camaro. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Mazda 626, 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, 2001 Chevrolet Camaro (475 Nm) has 325 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Mazda 626. (150 Nm). This means 2001 Chevrolet Camaro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Mazda 626.
Compare all specifications:
2001 Chevrolet Camaro | 2000 Mazda 626 | |
Make | Chevrolet | Mazda |
Model | Camaro | 626 |
Year Released | 2001 | 2000 |
Body Type | Coupe | Station Wagon |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5698 cc | 1840 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 100 HP |
Torque | 475 Nm | 150 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1540 kg | 1240 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4910 mm | 4680 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1720 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1310 mm | 1520 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2560 mm | 2680 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 71 L | 64 L |