1976 Mazda Cosmo vs. 2010 Nissan Pixo
To start off, 2010 Nissan Pixo is newer by 34 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1976 Mazda Cosmo. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1976 Mazda Cosmo would be higher. At 1,769 cc (4 cylinders), 1976 Mazda Cosmo is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1976 Mazda Cosmo (93 HP) has 25 more horse power than 2010 Nissan Pixo. (68 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1976 Mazda Cosmo should accelerate faster than 2010 Nissan Pixo.
Because 1976 Mazda Cosmo 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 1976 Mazda Cosmo. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Nissan Pixo, 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 1976 Mazda Cosmo | 2010 Nissan Pixo | |
| Make | Mazda | Nissan |
| Model | Cosmo | Pixo |
| Year Released | 1976 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1769 cc | 996 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 93 HP | 68 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4480 mm | 3580 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1690 mm | 1680 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1340 mm | 1400 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2520 mm | 2360 mm |
