2006 Holden UTE vs. 2012 Nissan Pixo
To start off, 2012 Nissan Pixo is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Holden UTE. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Holden UTE would be higher. At 3,789 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 Holden UTE is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Holden UTE (204 HP) has 136 more horse power than 2012 Nissan Pixo. (68 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Holden UTE should accelerate faster than 2012 Nissan Pixo.
Because 2006 Holden UTE 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 2006 Holden UTE. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 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:
| 2006 Holden UTE | 2012 Nissan Pixo | |
| Make | Holden | Nissan |
| Model | UTE | Pixo |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2012 |
| Body Type | Pickup | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3789 cc | 996 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 204 HP | 68 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5060 mm | 3580 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1680 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1490 mm | 1400 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2950 mm | 2360 mm |
