2010 Holden Commodore vs. 2012 Honda CR-Z
To start off, 2012 Honda CR-Z is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2010 Holden Commodore. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2010 Holden Commodore would be higher. At 5,976 cc (8 cylinders), 2010 Holden Commodore is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Holden Commodore (360 HP) has 238 more horse power than 2012 Honda CR-Z. (122 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2010 Holden Commodore should accelerate faster than 2012 Honda CR-Z.
Because 2010 Holden Commodore 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 2010 Holden Commodore. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 Honda CR-Z, 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. Let's talk about torque, 2010 Holden Commodore (290 Nm) has 117 more torque (in Nm) than 2012 Honda CR-Z. (173 Nm). This means 2010 Holden Commodore will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2012 Honda CR-Z.
Compare all specifications:
2010 Holden Commodore | 2012 Honda CR-Z | |
Make | Holden | Honda |
Model | Commodore | CR-Z |
Year Released | 2010 | 2012 |
Body Type | Station Wagon | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5976 cc | 1500 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 360 HP | 122 HP |
Torque | 290 Nm | 173 Nm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline / Electric Hybrid |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 3 doors |