2003 Holden UTE vs. 2010 Holden Commodore
To start off, 2010 Holden Commodore is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Holden UTE. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Holden UTE would be higher. At 3,791 cc (6 cylinders), 2003 Holden UTE is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Holden Commodore (240 HP) has 36 more horse power than 2003 Holden UTE. (204 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Holden Commodore should accelerate faster than 2003 Holden UTE.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front 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, 2003 Holden UTE (305 Nm) has 65 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Holden Commodore. (240 Nm). This means 2003 Holden UTE will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Holden Commodore.
Compare all specifications:
2003 Holden UTE | 2010 Holden Commodore | |
Make | Holden | Holden |
Model | UTE | Commodore |
Year Released | 2003 | 2010 |
Body Type | Pickup | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3791 cc | 2564 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 204 HP | 240 HP |
Torque | 305 Nm | 240 Nm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |