1984 Audi 200 vs. 2000 Chevrolet Tracker
To start off, 2000 Chevrolet Tracker is newer by 16 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1984 Audi 200. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1984 Audi 200 would be higher. At 2,144 cc (5 cylinders), 1984 Audi 200 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1984 Audi 200 (180 HP @ 5700 RPM) has 83 more horse power than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker. (97 HP @ 5200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1984 Audi 200 should accelerate faster than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker.
Because 2000 Chevrolet Tracker 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 2000 Chevrolet Tracker. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1984 Audi 200, 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, 1984 Audi 200 (253 Nm @ 3600 RPM) has 114 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker. (139 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 1984 Audi 200 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker.
Compare all specifications:
1984 Audi 200 | 2000 Chevrolet Tracker | |
Make | Audi | Chevrolet |
Model | 200 | Tracker |
Year Released | 1984 | 2000 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2144 cc | 1590 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 5 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 180 HP | 97 HP |
Engine RPM | 5700 RPM | 5200 RPM |
Torque | 253 Nm | 139 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3600 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Length | 4810 mm | 4140 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1820 mm | 1720 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1690 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2690 mm | 2210 mm |