2008 Mazda 6 vs. 2012 Holden Epica
To start off, 2012 Holden Epica is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2008 Mazda 6. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2008 Mazda 6 would be higher. At 2,492 cc (6 cylinders), 2012 Holden Epica is equipped with a bigger engine.
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, 2012 Holden Epica (237 Nm) has 30 more torque (in Nm) than 2008 Mazda 6. (207 Nm). This means 2012 Holden Epica will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2008 Mazda 6. 2008 Mazda 6 has automatic transmission and 2012 Holden Epica has manual transmission. 2012 Holden Epica will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2008 Mazda 6 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2008 Mazda 6 | 2012 Holden Epica | |
| Make | Mazda | Holden |
| Model | 6 | Epica |
| Year Released | 2008 | 2012 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2260 cc | 2492 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 153 HP |
| Torque | 207 Nm | 237 Nm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4620 mm | 4805 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 1810 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1760 mm | 1450 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 2700 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 10.5 L/100km | 9.3 L/100km |
