1982 Mazda Cosmo vs. 1980 Mitsubishi Colt
To start off, 1982 Mazda Cosmo is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1980 Mitsubishi Colt. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1980 Mitsubishi Colt would be higher. At 1,769 cc (4 cylinders), 1982 Mazda Cosmo is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1982 Mazda Cosmo weights approximately 280 kg more than 1980 Mitsubishi Colt.
Because 1982 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 1982 Mazda Cosmo. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1980 Mitsubishi Colt, 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 Mazda Cosmo | 1980 Mitsubishi Colt | |
| Make | Mazda | Mitsubishi |
| Model | Cosmo | Colt |
| Year Released | 1982 | 1980 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1769 cc | 1242 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 93 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 1090 kg | 810 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4670 mm | 3800 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1700 mm | 1590 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 1360 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2620 mm | 2310 mm |
