1968 Triumph 2000 vs. 2013 Chevrolet Equinox
To start off, 2013 Chevrolet Equinox is newer by 45 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1968 Triumph 2000. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1968 Triumph 2000 would be higher. At 2,400 cc (4 cylinders), 2013 Chevrolet Equinox is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Chevrolet Equinox (180 HP @ 6700 RPM) has 91 more horse power than 1968 Triumph 2000. (89 HP @ 5000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Chevrolet Equinox should accelerate faster than 1968 Triumph 2000. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Chevrolet Equinox weights approximately 611 kg more than 1968 Triumph 2000. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2013 Chevrolet Equinox (233 Nm @ 4900 RPM) has 75 more torque (in Nm) than 1968 Triumph 2000. (158 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2013 Chevrolet Equinox will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1968 Triumph 2000.
Compare all specifications:
1968 Triumph 2000 | 2013 Chevrolet Equinox | |
Make | Triumph | Chevrolet |
Model | 2000 | Equinox |
Year Released | 1968 | 2013 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1998 cc | 2400 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 89 HP | 180 HP |
Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 6700 RPM |
Torque | 158 Nm | 233 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 4900 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Flex Fuel |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1170 kg | 1781 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4420 mm | 4771 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1660 mm | 1842 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1684 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2700 mm | 2857 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 71 L |