1982 Buick Skyhawk vs. 1981 Mazda Cosmo
To start off, 1982 Buick Skyhawk is newer by 1 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 2,210 cc (4 cylinders), 1981 Mazda Cosmo is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1982 Buick Skyhawk (101 HP @ 5600 RPM) has 35 more horse power than 1981 Mazda Cosmo. (66 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1982 Buick Skyhawk should accelerate faster than 1981 Mazda Cosmo. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1981 Mazda Cosmo weights approximately 115 kg more than 1982 Buick Skyhawk.
Because 1981 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 1981 Mazda Cosmo. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1982 Buick Skyhawk, 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:
| 1982 Buick Skyhawk | 1981 Mazda Cosmo | |
| Make | Buick | Mazda |
| Model | Skyhawk | Cosmo |
| Year Released | 1982 | 1981 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1996 cc | 2210 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 101 HP | 66 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 1080 kg | 1195 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4560 mm | 4670 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1660 mm | 1700 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2620 mm |
