1996 Holden XU 6 vs. 1976 Mazda RX-2
To start off, 1996 Holden XU 6 is newer by 20 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1976 Mazda RX-2. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1976 Mazda RX-2 would be higher.
Because 1976 Mazda RX-2 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 1976 Mazda RX-2. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1996 Holden XU 6, 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, 1996 Holden XU 6 (515 Nm) has 358 more torque (in Nm) than 1976 Mazda RX-2. (157 Nm). This means 1996 Holden XU 6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1976 Mazda RX-2.
Compare all specifications:
| 1996 Holden XU 6 | 1976 Mazda RX-2 | |
| Make | Holden | Mazda |
| Model | XU 6 | RX-2 |
| Year Released | 1996 | 1976 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Type | V | dual-disk rotary |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 118 HP |
| Torque | 515 Nm | 157 Nm |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
