1952 Allard K2 vs. 1996 Chevrolet Tracker
To start off, 1996 Chevrolet Tracker is newer by 44 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1952 Allard K2. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1952 Allard K2 would be higher. At 3,622 cc (8 cylinders), 1952 Allard K2 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1996 Chevrolet Tracker (96 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 11 more horse power than 1952 Allard K2. (85 HP @ 3600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1996 Chevrolet Tracker should accelerate faster than 1952 Allard K2. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1996 Chevrolet Tracker weights approximately 30 kg more than 1952 Allard K2. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 1996 Chevrolet Tracker is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1952 Allard K2. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1996 Chevrolet Tracker will offer significantly more control. 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:
1952 Allard K2 | 1996 Chevrolet Tracker | |
Make | Allard | Chevrolet |
Model | K2 | Tracker |
Year Released | 1952 | 1996 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3622 cc | 1589 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 85 HP | 96 HP |
Engine RPM | 3600 RPM | 5200 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Vehicle Weight | 1200 kg | 1230 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4270 mm | 3860 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1810 mm | 1720 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1580 mm | 1700 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2700 mm | 2210 mm |