1986 Caterham 1700 vs. 2013 Chevrolet Camaro
To start off, 2013 Chevrolet Camaro is newer by 27 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1986 Caterham 1700. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1986 Caterham 1700 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 252 more horse power than 1986 Caterham 1700. (168 HP @ 6500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Chevrolet Camaro should accelerate faster than 1986 Caterham 1700.
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.
Compare all specifications:
| 1986 Caterham 1700 | 2013 Chevrolet Camaro | |
| Make | Caterham | Chevrolet |
| Model | 1700 | Camaro |
| Year Released | 1986 | 2013 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1692 cc | 6200 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 168 HP | 420 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 5900 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 11.0:1 | 10.7 |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed manual |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 4 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 3390 mm | 4836 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1590 mm | 1918 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1050 mm | 1377 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2260 mm | 2852 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 36 L | 72 L |
