1957 Austin-Healey 100 vs. 2000 Chevrolet Tracker
To start off, 2000 Chevrolet Tracker is newer by 43 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1957 Austin-Healey 100. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1957 Austin-Healey 100 would be higher. At 2,639 cc (6 cylinders), 1957 Austin-Healey 100 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1957 Austin-Healey 100 (101 HP @ 4600 RPM) has 4 more horse power than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker. (97 HP @ 5200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1957 Austin-Healey 100 should accelerate faster than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front 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, 1957 Austin-Healey 100 (143 Nm @ 2400 RPM) has 4 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker. (139 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 1957 Austin-Healey 100 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker.
Compare all specifications:
1957 Austin-Healey 100 | 2000 Chevrolet Tracker | |
Make | Austin-Healey | Chevrolet |
Model | 100 | Tracker |
Year Released | 1957 | 2000 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2639 cc | 1590 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 101 HP | 97 HP |
Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 5200 RPM |
Torque | 143 Nm | 139 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2400 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Length | 4010 mm | 4140 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1540 mm | 1720 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1250 mm | 1690 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2340 mm | 2210 mm |