1985 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 2004 Suzuki Wagon R+
To start off, 2004 Suzuki Wagon R+ is newer by 19 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1985 Chevrolet Camaro. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1985 Chevrolet Camaro would be higher. At 2,833 cc (6 cylinders), 1985 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1985 Chevrolet Camaro (133 HP @ 5100 RPM) has 40 more horse power than 2004 Suzuki Wagon R+. (93 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1985 Chevrolet Camaro should accelerate faster than 2004 Suzuki Wagon R+.
Because 2004 Suzuki Wagon R+ is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1985 Chevrolet Camaro. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Suzuki Wagon R+ 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, 1985 Chevrolet Camaro (223 Nm @ 3600 RPM) has 105 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Suzuki Wagon R+. (118 Nm @ 4100 RPM). This means 1985 Chevrolet Camaro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Suzuki Wagon R+.
Compare all specifications:
1985 Chevrolet Camaro | 2004 Suzuki Wagon R+ | |
Make | Chevrolet | Suzuki |
Model | Camaro | Wagon R+ |
Year Released | 1985 | 2004 |
Body Type | Coupe | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2833 cc | 1298 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 133 HP | 93 HP |
Engine RPM | 5100 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 223 Nm | 118 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3600 RPM | 4100 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 3 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4880 mm | 3420 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1580 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2340 mm |