1965 Autobianchi Stellina vs. 2003 Chevrolet Tracker
To start off, 2003 Chevrolet Tracker is newer by 38 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 Autobianchi Stellina. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 Autobianchi Stellina would be higher. At 1,590 cc (4 cylinders), 2003 Chevrolet Tracker is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Chevrolet Tracker (97 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 70 more horse power than 1965 Autobianchi Stellina. (27 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2003 Chevrolet Tracker should accelerate faster than 1965 Autobianchi Stellina.
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, 2003 Chevrolet Tracker (139 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 84 more torque (in Nm) than 1965 Autobianchi Stellina. (55 Nm @ 2800 RPM). This means 2003 Chevrolet Tracker will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1965 Autobianchi Stellina.
Compare all specifications:
| 1965 Autobianchi Stellina | 2003 Chevrolet Tracker | |
| Make | Autobianchi | Chevrolet |
| Model | Stellina | Tracker |
| Year Released | 1965 | 2003 |
| Engine Size | 767 cc | 1590 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 27 HP | 97 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 5200 RPM |
| Torque | 55 Nm | 139 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2800 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 3680 mm | 3860 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1440 mm | 1720 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1250 mm | 1700 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2010 mm | 2210 mm |
