1994 Mazda Midge vs. 2010 Holden UTE
To start off, 2010 Holden UTE is newer by 16 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1994 Mazda Midge. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1994 Mazda Midge would be higher. At 6,000 cc (8 cylinders), 2010 Holden UTE is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Holden UTE (357 HP) has 253 more horse power than 1994 Mazda Midge. (104 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Holden UTE should accelerate faster than 1994 Mazda Midge.
Because 2010 Holden UTE 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 2010 Holden UTE. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1994 Mazda Midge, 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. Let's talk about torque, 2010 Holden UTE (530 Nm) has 374 more torque (in Nm) than 1994 Mazda Midge. (156 Nm). This means 2010 Holden UTE will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1994 Mazda Midge.
Compare all specifications:
| 1994 Mazda Midge | 2010 Holden UTE | |
| Make | Mazda | Holden |
| Model | Midge | UTE |
| Year Released | 1994 | 2010 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1998 cc | 6000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 104 HP | 357 HP |
| Torque | 156 Nm | 530 Nm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
