2004 Mazda 2 vs. 2008 Holden Commodore
To start off, 2008 Holden Commodore is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Mazda 2. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Mazda 2 would be higher. At 5,976 cc (8 cylinders), 2008 Holden Commodore is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2008 Holden Commodore (360 HP) has 261 more horse power than 2004 Mazda 2. (99 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2008 Holden Commodore should accelerate faster than 2004 Mazda 2.
Because 2008 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 2008 Holden Commodore. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Mazda 2, 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, 2008 Holden Commodore (290 Nm) has 144 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Mazda 2. (146 Nm). This means 2008 Holden Commodore will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Mazda 2.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Mazda 2 | 2008 Holden Commodore | |
| Make | Mazda | Holden |
| Model | 2 | Commodore |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2008 |
| Body Type | Hatchback | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1560 cc | 5976 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 99 HP | 360 HP |
| Torque | 146 Nm | 290 Nm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline - Premium | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 6.9 L/100km | 14.4 L/100km |
