2002 Holden UTE vs. 2004 Ford Ecosport
To start off, 2004 Ford Ecosport is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Holden UTE. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Holden UTE would be higher. At 3,791 cc (6 cylinders), 2002 Holden UTE is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 Holden UTE (204 HP) has 110 more horse power than 2004 Ford Ecosport. (94 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2002 Holden UTE should accelerate faster than 2004 Ford Ecosport.
Because 2002 Holden UTE 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 2002 Holden UTE. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Ford Ecosport, 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:
| 2002 Holden UTE | 2004 Ford Ecosport | |
| Make | Holden | Ford |
| Model | UTE | Ecosport |
| Year Released | 2002 | 2004 |
| Body Type | Pickup | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3791 cc | 1000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 204 HP | 94 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5060 mm | 4228 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1980 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1490 mm | 1679 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2950 mm | 2490 mm |
