2005 Mazda 3 vs. 2009 Holden Epica
To start off, 2009 Holden Epica is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Mazda 3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Mazda 3 would be higher. At 1,991 cc (4 cylinders), 2009 Holden Epica is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Holden Epica (148 HP) has 44 more horse power than 2005 Mazda 3. (104 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Holden Epica should accelerate faster than 2005 Mazda 3.
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 (320 Nm) has 172 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Mazda 3. (148 Nm). This means 2009 Holden Epica will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Mazda 3. 2009 Holden Epica has automatic transmission and 2005 Mazda 3 has manual transmission. 2005 Mazda 3 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2009 Holden Epica will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Mazda 3 | 2009 Holden Epica | |
Make | Mazda | Holden |
Model | 3 | Epica |
Year Released | 2005 | 2009 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1598 cc | 1991 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 104 HP | 148 HP |
Torque | 148 Nm | 320 Nm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 3 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4430 mm | 4805 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1810 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1450 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2610 mm | 2700 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 7.4 L/100km | 7.5 L/100km |