1982 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 2004 Mitsubishi L 200
To start off, 2004 Mitsubishi L 200 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 4,995 cc (8 cylinders), 1982 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1982 Chevrolet Camaro (163 HP @ 4200 RPM) has 53 more horse power than 2004 Mitsubishi L 200. (110 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1982 Chevrolet Camaro should accelerate faster than 2004 Mitsubishi L 200.
Because 2004 Mitsubishi L 200 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1982 Chevrolet Camaro. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Mitsubishi L 200 will offer significantly more control. 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, 1982 Chevrolet Camaro (325 Nm @ 2400 RPM) has 85 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Mitsubishi L 200. (240 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 1982 Chevrolet Camaro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Mitsubishi L 200.
Compare all specifications:
1982 Chevrolet Camaro | 2004 Mitsubishi L 200 | |
Make | Chevrolet | Mitsubishi |
Model | Camaro | L 200 |
Year Released | 1982 | 2004 |
Body Type | Coupe | Pickup |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4995 cc | 2350 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 163 HP | 110 HP |
Engine RPM | 4200 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Torque | 325 Nm | 240 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2400 RPM | 2000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
Vehicle Length | 4880 mm | 5060 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1710 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1290 mm | 1790 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2570 mm | 2970 mm |