1962 AC Aceca vs. 2004 Chevrolet Tracker
To start off, 2004 Chevrolet Tracker is newer by 42 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1962 AC Aceca. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1962 AC Aceca would be higher. At 2,491 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Chevrolet Tracker is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Chevrolet Tracker (165 HP @ 5600 RPM) has 40 more horse power than 1962 AC Aceca. (125 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2004 Chevrolet Tracker should accelerate faster than 1962 AC Aceca. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Chevrolet Tracker weights approximately 406 kg more than 1962 AC Aceca. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2004 Chevrolet Tracker (221 Nm) has 54 more torque (in Nm) than 1962 AC Aceca. (167 Nm). This means 2004 Chevrolet Tracker will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1962 AC Aceca.
Compare all specifications:
1962 AC Aceca | 2004 Chevrolet Tracker | |
Make | AC | Chevrolet |
Model | Aceca | Tracker |
Year Released | 1962 | 2004 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1971 cc | 2491 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 125 HP | 165 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5600 RPM |
Torque | 167 Nm | 221 Nm |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 894 kg | 1300 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4070 mm | 4140 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1560 mm | 1720 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1330 mm | 1670 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2290 mm | 2490 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 59 L | 61 L |