1986 Dodge Charger vs. 1963 Triumph 2000
To start off, 1986 Dodge Charger is newer by 23 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Triumph 2000. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Triumph 2000 would be higher. At 2,498 cc (6 cylinders), 1963 Triumph 2000 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1963 Triumph 2000 (130 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 68 more horse power than 1986 Dodge Charger. (62 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1963 Triumph 2000 should accelerate faster than 1986 Dodge Charger. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1963 Triumph 2000 weights approximately 145 kg more than 1986 Dodge Charger. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 1963 Triumph 2000 (198 Nm @ 2000 RPM) has 81 more torque (in Nm) than 1986 Dodge Charger. (117 Nm @ 3200 RPM). This means 1963 Triumph 2000 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1986 Dodge Charger.
Compare all specifications:
| 1986 Dodge Charger | 1963 Triumph 2000 | |
| Make | Dodge | Triumph |
| Model | Charger | 2000 |
| Year Released | 1986 | 1963 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1592 cc | 2498 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 62 HP | 130 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Torque | 117 Nm | 198 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3200 RPM | 2000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1050 kg | 1195 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4430 mm | 4420 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1700 mm | 1660 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1300 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2460 mm | 2700 mm |
