2004 Mitsubishi Colt vs. 2009 Holden Epica
To start off, 2009 Holden Epica is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Mitsubishi Colt. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Mitsubishi Colt would be higher. At 2,492 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Holden Epica is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Holden Epica (153 HP) has 59 more horse power than 2004 Mitsubishi Colt. (94 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Holden Epica should accelerate faster than 2004 Mitsubishi Colt.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear 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, 2009 Holden Epica (237 Nm) has 27 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Mitsubishi Colt. (210 Nm). This means 2009 Holden Epica will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Mitsubishi Colt.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Mitsubishi Colt | 2009 Holden Epica | |
Make | Mitsubishi | Holden |
Model | Colt | Epica |
Year Released | 2004 | 2009 |
Body Type | Hatchback | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1499 cc | 2492 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 3 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 94 HP | 153 HP |
Torque | 210 Nm | 237 Nm |
Fuel Type | Diesel | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 3880 mm | 4805 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1700 mm | 1810 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1560 mm | 1450 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2610 mm | 2700 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 4.6 L/100km | 9.3 L/100km |