1966 Alfa Romeo 2600 vs. 2000 Chevrolet Camaro
To start off, 2000 Chevrolet Camaro is newer by 34 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Alfa Romeo 2600. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Alfa Romeo 2600 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 170 kg more than 1966 Alfa Romeo 2600.
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 (468 Nm) has 248 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 Alfa Romeo 2600. (220 Nm). This means 2000 Chevrolet Camaro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1966 Alfa Romeo 2600.
Compare all specifications:
| 1966 Alfa Romeo 2600 | 2000 Chevrolet Camaro | |
| Make | Alfa Romeo | Chevrolet |
| Model | 2600 | Camaro |
| Year Released | 1966 | 2000 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2583 cc | 5670 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 163 HP | 0 HP |
| Torque | 220 Nm | 468 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1370 kg | 1540 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4380 mm | 4910 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1890 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1390 mm | 1330 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2510 mm | 2570 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 60 L | 57 L |
