2003 Mazda 6 vs. 2010 Ford Ka
To start off, 2010 Ford Ka is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Mazda 6. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Mazda 6 would be higher. At 1,796 cc (4 cylinders), 2003 Mazda 6 is equipped with a bigger engine.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear wheel drive vehicles. 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. 2010 Ford Ka has automatic transmission and 2003 Mazda 6 has manual transmission. 2003 Mazda 6 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2010 Ford Ka will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
2003 Mazda 6 | 2010 Ford Ka | |
Make | Mazda | Ford |
Model | 6 | Ka |
Year Released | 2003 | 2010 |
Body Type | Station Wagon | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1796 cc | 1297 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 118 HP | 0 HP |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 3 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4690 mm | 3660 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 1830 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1440 mm | 1420 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 2450 mm |