1982 Autobianchi A 112 vs. 1996 Chevrolet Camaro
To start off, 1996 Chevrolet Camaro is newer by 14 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Autobianchi A 112. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Autobianchi A 112 would be higher. At 3,791 cc (6 cylinders), 1996 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1996 Chevrolet Camaro weights approximately 840 kg more than 1982 Autobianchi A 112.
Because 1996 Chevrolet Camaro is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 1996 Chevrolet Camaro. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1982 Autobianchi A 112, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 1982 Autobianchi A 112 | 1996 Chevrolet Camaro | |
| Make | Autobianchi | Chevrolet |
| Model | A 112 | Camaro |
| Year Released | 1982 | 1996 |
| Body Type | Hatchback | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 965 cc | 3791 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 200 HP |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 3 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 660 kg | 1500 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3280 mm | 4910 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1490 mm | 1890 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1310 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2050 mm | 2570 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 30 L | 58 L |
