1964 Austin Princess vs. 2003 Chevrolet Tracker
To start off, 2003 Chevrolet Tracker is newer by 39 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Austin Princess. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Austin Princess would be higher. At 3,993 cc (6 cylinders), 1964 Austin Princess is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1964 Austin Princess (119 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 22 more horse power than 2003 Chevrolet Tracker. (97 HP @ 5200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1964 Austin Princess should accelerate faster than 2003 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, 1964 Austin Princess (251 Nm @ 2000 RPM) has 112 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Chevrolet Tracker. (139 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 1964 Austin Princess will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Chevrolet Tracker.
Compare all specifications:
1964 Austin Princess | 2003 Chevrolet Tracker | |
Make | Austin | Chevrolet |
Model | Princess | Tracker |
Year Released | 1964 | 2003 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3993 cc | 1590 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 119 HP | 97 HP |
Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 5200 RPM |
Torque | 251 Nm | 139 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Vehicle Length | 5470 mm | 3860 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1900 mm | 1720 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1780 mm | 1700 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3360 mm | 2210 mm |