1959 Alpine A 106 vs. 2010 Chevrolet Camaro
To start off, 2010 Chevrolet Camaro is newer by 51 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1959 Alpine A 106. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1959 Alpine A 106 would be higher. At 3,600 cc (6 cylinders), 2010 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2010 Chevrolet Camaro weights approximately 1167 kg more than 1959 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, 2010 Chevrolet Camaro (370 Nm @ 5200 RPM) has 325 more torque (in Nm) than 1959 Alpine A 106. (45 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 2010 Chevrolet Camaro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1959 Alpine A 106.
Compare all specifications:
1959 Alpine A 106 | 2010 Chevrolet Camaro | |
Make | Alpine | Chevrolet |
Model | A 106 | Camaro |
Year Released | 1959 | 2010 |
Body Type | Coupe | Coupe |
Engine Position | Rear | Front |
Engine Size | 747 cc | 3600 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 304 HP |
Torque | 45 Nm | 370 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 5200 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 530 kg | 1697 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3700 mm | 4836 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1450 mm | 1918 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1280 mm | 1377 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2110 mm | 2852 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 28 L | 72 L |