1982 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 2004 Seat Altea
To start off, 2004 Seat Altea 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 2,835 cc (6 cylinders), 1982 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, both vehicles can yield 101 horse power. So under normal driving conditions, the acceleration of both vehicles should be relatively similar.
Because 1982 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 1982 Chevrolet Camaro. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Seat Altea, 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. Let's talk about torque, 2004 Seat Altea (326 Nm @ 3800 RPM) has 134 more torque (in Nm) than 1982 Chevrolet Camaro. (192 Nm @ 2400 RPM). This means 2004 Seat Altea will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1982 Chevrolet Camaro.
Compare all specifications:
1982 Chevrolet Camaro | 2004 Seat Altea | |
Make | Chevrolet | Seat |
Model | Camaro | Altea |
Year Released | 1982 | 2004 |
Body Type | Coupe | Minivan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2835 cc | 1597 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 101 HP | 101 HP |
Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 5600 RPM |
Torque | 192 Nm | 326 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2400 RPM | 3800 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4880 mm | 4290 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1770 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2590 mm |