1967 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 2002 Ford GT 40
To start off, 2002 Ford GT 40 is newer by 35 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1967 Chevrolet Camaro. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1967 Chevrolet Camaro would be higher. At 4,958 cc (8 cylinders), 1967 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 Ford GT 40 (350 HP @ 7200 RPM) has 60 more horse power than 1967 Chevrolet Camaro. (290 HP @ 5800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2002 Ford GT 40 should accelerate faster than 1967 Chevrolet Camaro.
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, 1967 Chevrolet Camaro (393 Nm) has 308 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 Ford GT 40. (85 Nm). This means 1967 Chevrolet Camaro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 Ford GT 40.
Compare all specifications:
| 1967 Chevrolet Camaro | 2002 Ford GT 40 | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Ford |
| Model | Camaro | GT 40 |
| Year Released | 1967 | 2002 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Middle |
| Engine Size | 4958 cc | 4195 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 290 HP | 350 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5800 RPM | 7200 RPM |
| Torque | 393 Nm | 85 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 101.7 mm | 95.6 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 76.3 mm | 72.9 mm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4700 mm | 4620 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1840 mm | 1960 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1300 mm | 1110 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2750 mm | 2620 mm |
