1981 Mazda Cosmo vs. 2009 Holden Caprice
To start off, 2009 Holden Caprice is newer by 28 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1981 Mazda Cosmo. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1981 Mazda Cosmo would be higher. At 3,600 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Holden Caprice is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Holden Caprice (278 HP) has 212 more horse power than 1981 Mazda Cosmo. (66 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Holden Caprice should accelerate faster than 1981 Mazda Cosmo.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front 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. Let's talk about torque, 2009 Holden Caprice (350 Nm) has 208 more torque (in Nm) than 1981 Mazda Cosmo. (142 Nm). This means 2009 Holden Caprice will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1981 Mazda Cosmo. 2009 Holden Caprice has automatic transmission and 1981 Mazda Cosmo has manual transmission. 1981 Mazda Cosmo will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2009 Holden Caprice will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 1981 Mazda Cosmo | 2009 Holden Caprice | |
| Make | Mazda | Holden |
| Model | Cosmo | Caprice |
| Year Released | 1981 | 2009 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2210 cc | 3600 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 66 HP | 278 HP |
| Torque | 142 Nm | 350 Nm |
| Fuel Type | Diesel | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
