2004 Holden UTE vs. 2006 Mazda 6
To start off, 2006 Mazda 6 is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Holden UTE. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Holden UTE would be higher. At 3,791 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Holden UTE is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Holden UTE (204 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 65 more horse power than 2006 Mazda 6. (139 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Holden UTE should accelerate faster than 2006 Mazda 6.
Because 2004 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 2004 Holden UTE. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Mazda 6, 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, 2004 Holden UTE (305 Nm @ 3600 RPM) has 95 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Mazda 6. (210 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2004 Holden UTE will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Mazda 6.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Holden UTE | 2006 Mazda 6 | |
Make | Holden | Mazda |
Model | UTE | 6 |
Year Released | 2004 | 2006 |
Body Type | Pickup | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3791 cc | 2260 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 204 HP | 139 HP |
Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 305 Nm | 210 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3600 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 5060 mm | 4750 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1790 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1490 mm | 1450 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2950 mm | 2680 mm |