1982 Mitsubishi Sigma vs. 2013 Chevrolet Camaro
To start off, 2013 Chevrolet Camaro is newer by 31 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Mitsubishi Sigma. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Mitsubishi Sigma would be higher. At 6,200 cc (8 cylinders), 2013 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Chevrolet Camaro (420 HP @ 5900 RPM) has 331 more horse power than 1982 Mitsubishi Sigma. (89 HP @ 5600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Chevrolet Camaro should accelerate faster than 1982 Mitsubishi Sigma.
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, 2013 Chevrolet Camaro (569 Nm @ 4600 RPM) has 451 more torque (in Nm) than 1982 Mitsubishi Sigma. (118 Nm @ 3200 RPM). This means 2013 Chevrolet Camaro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1982 Mitsubishi Sigma.
Compare all specifications:
| 1982 Mitsubishi Sigma | 2013 Chevrolet Camaro | |
| Make | Mitsubishi | Chevrolet |
| Model | Sigma | Camaro |
| Year Released | 1982 | 2013 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1597 cc | 6200 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 89 HP | 420 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 5900 RPM |
| Torque | 118 Nm | 569 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3200 RPM | 4600 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed manual |
| Vehicle Length | 4460 mm | 4836 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1660 mm | 1918 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1377 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2520 mm | 2852 mm |
