1983 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 2006 Mazda Tribute
To start off, 2006 Mazda Tribute is newer by 23 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1983 Chevrolet Camaro. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1983 Chevrolet Camaro would be higher. At 2,473 cc (6 cylinders), 1983 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Mazda Tribute (153 HP @ 5800 RPM) has 64 more horse power than 1983 Chevrolet Camaro. (89 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Mazda Tribute should accelerate faster than 1983 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, 2006 Mazda Tribute (206 Nm @ 4250 RPM) has 27 more torque (in Nm) than 1983 Chevrolet Camaro. (179 Nm @ 2800 RPM). This means 2006 Mazda Tribute will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1983 Chevrolet Camaro.
Compare all specifications:
| 1983 Chevrolet Camaro | 2006 Mazda Tribute | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Mazda |
| Model | Camaro | Tribute |
| Year Released | 1983 | 2006 |
| Body Type | Coupe | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2473 cc | 2260 cc |
| Horse Power | 89 HP | 153 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 5800 RPM |
| Torque | 179 Nm | 206 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2800 RPM | 4250 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4880 mm | 4440 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1840 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2630 mm |
