2002 Eagle Talon vs. 2010 Holden Commodore
To start off, 2010 Holden Commodore is newer by 8 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Eagle Talon. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Eagle Talon would be higher. At 5,976 cc (8 cylinders), 2010 Holden Commodore is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Holden Commodore (360 HP) has 151 more horse power than 2002 Eagle Talon. (209 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Holden Commodore should accelerate faster than 2002 Eagle Talon.
Because 2010 Holden Commodore 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 Commodore. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2002 Eagle Talon, 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, both vehicles can yield 290 Nm of torque. So under normal driving conditions, the ability to climb up hills and pull heavy equipment should be relatively similar for both vehicles.
Compare all specifications:
| 2002 Eagle Talon | 2010 Holden Commodore | |
| Make | Eagle | Holden |
| Model | Talon | Commodore |
| Year Released | 2002 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Station Wagon |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1996 cc | 5976 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 209 HP | 360 HP |
| Torque | 290 Nm | 290 Nm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
