1999 Holden Maloo vs. 1984 Mazda Cosmo
To start off, 1999 Holden Maloo is newer by 15 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1984 Mazda Cosmo. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1984 Mazda Cosmo would be higher. At 5,699 cc (8 cylinders), 1999 Holden Maloo is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 1984 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 1984 Mazda Cosmo. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1999 Holden Maloo, 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, 1999 Holden Maloo (542 Nm) has 341 more torque (in Nm) than 1984 Mazda Cosmo. (201 Nm). This means 1999 Holden Maloo will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1984 Mazda Cosmo. 1984 Mazda Cosmo has automatic transmission and 1999 Holden Maloo has manual transmission. 1999 Holden Maloo will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 1984 Mazda Cosmo will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
1999 Holden Maloo | 1984 Mazda Cosmo | |
Make | Holden | Mazda |
Model | Maloo | Cosmo |
Year Released | 1999 | 1984 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5699 cc | 2616 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 2 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 148 HP |
Torque | 542 Nm | 201 Nm |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 3 seats | 5 seats |