1958 Alpine A 106 vs. 2000 Chevrolet Camaro
To start off, 2000 Chevrolet Camaro is newer by 42 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1958 Alpine A 106. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1958 Alpine A 106 would be higher. At 5,670 cc (8 cylinders), 2000 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Chevrolet Camaro weights approximately 633 kg more than 1958 Alpine A 106.
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, 2000 Chevrolet Camaro (454 Nm) has 397 more torque (in Nm) than 1958 Alpine A 106. (57 Nm). This means 2000 Chevrolet Camaro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1958 Alpine A 106.
Compare all specifications:
| 1958 Alpine A 106 | 2000 Chevrolet Camaro | |
| Make | Alpine | Chevrolet |
| Model | A 106 | Camaro |
| Year Released | 1958 | 2000 |
| Body Type | Convertible | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Rear | Front |
| Engine Size | 845 cc | 5670 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 49 HP | 0 HP |
| Torque | 57 Nm | 454 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 555 kg | 1188 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3710 mm | 4910 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1460 mm | 1890 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1180 mm | 1310 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2110 mm | 2570 mm |
