1982 Nissan Pulsar vs. 2010 Holden Epica
To start off, 2010 Holden Epica is newer by 28 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Nissan Pulsar. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Nissan Pulsar would be higher. At 2,492 cc (6 cylinders), 2010 Holden Epica is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Holden Epica (153 HP) has 83 more horse power than 1982 Nissan Pulsar. (70 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Holden Epica should accelerate faster than 1982 Nissan Pulsar.
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. Let's talk about torque, 2010 Holden Epica (237 Nm) has 122 more torque (in Nm) than 1982 Nissan Pulsar. (115 Nm). This means 2010 Holden Epica will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1982 Nissan Pulsar.
Compare all specifications:
| 1982 Nissan Pulsar | 2010 Holden Epica | |
| Make | Nissan | Holden |
| Model | Pulsar | Epica |
| Year Released | 1982 | 2010 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1488 cc | 2492 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 70 HP | 153 HP |
| Torque | 115 Nm | 237 Nm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Length | 3970 mm | 4805 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1630 mm | 1810 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1450 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2420 mm | 2700 mm |
