2000 AC Aceca vs. 2009 Nissan Pixo
To start off, 2009 Nissan Pixo is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 AC Aceca. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 AC Aceca would be higher. At 4,600 cc (8 cylinders), 2000 AC Aceca is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 AC Aceca (301 HP) has 233 more horse power than 2009 Nissan Pixo. (68 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2000 AC Aceca should accelerate faster than 2009 Nissan Pixo.
Because 2000 AC Aceca 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 2000 AC Aceca. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Nissan Pixo, 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:
| 2000 AC Aceca | 2009 Nissan Pixo | |
| Make | AC | Nissan |
| Model | Aceca | Pixo |
| Year Released | 2000 | 2009 |
| Body Type | Convertible | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4600 cc | 996 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 301 HP | 68 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4430 mm | 3580 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1880 mm | 1680 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1310 mm | 1400 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2480 mm | 2360 mm |
