1982 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 2004 Chrysler Crossfire
To start off, 2004 Chrysler Crossfire is newer by 22 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Chevrolet Camaro. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Chevrolet Camaro would be higher. At 3,196 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Chrysler Crossfire is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Chrysler Crossfire (215 HP @ 5700 RPM) has 126 more horse power than 1982 Chevrolet Camaro. (89 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2004 Chrysler Crossfire should accelerate faster than 1982 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, 2004 Chrysler Crossfire (340 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 161 more torque (in Nm) than 1982 Chevrolet Camaro. (179 Nm @ 2800 RPM). This means 2004 Chrysler Crossfire will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1982 Chevrolet Camaro.
Compare all specifications:
| 1982 Chevrolet Camaro | 2004 Chrysler Crossfire | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Chrysler |
| Model | Camaro | Crossfire |
| Year Released | 1982 | 2004 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2474 cc | 3196 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 89 HP | 215 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 5700 RPM |
| Torque | 179 Nm | 340 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2800 RPM | 3000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4880 mm | 4060 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1760 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2410 mm |
