2000 Holden HRT vs. 1996 Mazda 626
To start off, 2000 Holden HRT is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Mazda 626. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Mazda 626 would be higher. At 5,000 cc (8 cylinders), 2000 Holden HRT is equipped with a bigger engine.
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, 2000 Holden HRT (815 Nm) has 670 more torque (in Nm) than 1996 Mazda 626. (145 Nm). This means 2000 Holden HRT will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1996 Mazda 626.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Holden HRT | 1996 Mazda 626 | |
| Make | Holden | Mazda |
| Model | HRT | 626 |
| Year Released | 2000 | 1996 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5000 cc | 1840 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 89 HP |
| Torque | 815 Nm | 145 Nm |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
