2004 Mazda 6 vs. 2010 Holden UTE
To start off, 2010 Holden UTE is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Mazda 6. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Mazda 6 would be higher. At 3,600 cc (6 cylinders), 2010 Holden UTE is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Mazda 6 (256 HP) has 14 more horse power than 2010 Holden UTE. (242 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Mazda 6 should accelerate faster than 2010 Holden UTE.
Because 2004 Mazda 6 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2010 Holden UTE. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Mazda 6 will offer significantly more control. 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 Mazda 6 (380 Nm) has 50 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Holden UTE. (330 Nm). This means 2004 Mazda 6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Holden UTE.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Mazda 6 | 2010 Holden UTE | |
Make | Mazda | Holden |
Model | 6 | UTE |
Year Released | 2004 | 2010 |
Body Type | Sedan | Pickup |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2261 cc | 3600 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 256 HP | 242 HP |
Torque | 380 Nm | 330 Nm |
Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |