1973 Chrysler Charger vs. 2002 Toyota Tundra
To start off, 2002 Toyota Tundra is newer by 29 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1973 Chrysler Charger. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1973 Chrysler Charger would be higher. At 4,698 cc (8 cylinders), 2002 Toyota Tundra is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 Toyota Tundra (245 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 107 more horse power than 1973 Chrysler Charger. (138 HP @ 4400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2002 Toyota Tundra should accelerate faster than 1973 Chrysler Charger. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1973 Chrysler Charger weights approximately 437 kg more than 2002 Toyota Tundra.
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, 2002 Toyota Tundra (427 Nm) has 155 more torque (in Nm) than 1973 Chrysler Charger. (272 Nm). This means 2002 Toyota Tundra will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1973 Chrysler Charger.
Compare all specifications:
1973 Chrysler Charger | 2002 Toyota Tundra | |
Make | Chrysler | Toyota |
Model | Charger | Tundra |
Year Released | 1973 | 2002 |
Body Type | Coupe | Pickup |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3523 cc | 4698 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 138 HP | 245 HP |
Engine RPM | 4400 RPM | 5200 RPM |
Torque | 272 Nm | 427 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1360 kg | 923 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4570 mm | 5530 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1920 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1410 mm | 1800 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 3270 mm |