2005 MCC Crossblade vs. 2010 Nissan Pixo
To start off, 2010 Nissan Pixo is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 MCC Crossblade. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 MCC Crossblade would be higher. At 996 cc (3 cylinders), 2010 Nissan Pixo is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 MCC Crossblade (70 HP) has 2 more horse power than 2010 Nissan Pixo. (68 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2005 MCC Crossblade should accelerate faster than 2010 Nissan Pixo.
Because 2005 MCC Crossblade 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 2005 MCC Crossblade. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Nissan Pixo, 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 MCC Crossblade | 2010 Nissan Pixo | |
| Make | MCC | Nissan |
| Model | Crossblade | Pixo |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2010 |
| Engine Size | 599 cc | 996 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 3 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 70 HP | 68 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Length | 2630 mm | 3580 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1630 mm | 1680 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1520 mm | 1400 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 1810 mm | 2360 mm |
