1992 Alpina B6 vs. 2000 Chevrolet Tracker
To start off, 2000 Chevrolet Tracker is newer by 8 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1992 Alpina B6. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1992 Alpina B6 would be higher. At 2,752 cc (6 cylinders), 1992 Alpina B6 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1992 Alpina B6 (238 HP @ 5900 RPM) has 141 more horse power than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker. (97 HP @ 5200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1992 Alpina B6 should accelerate faster than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker.
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, 1992 Alpina B6 (293 Nm @ 4700 RPM) has 154 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker. (139 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 1992 Alpina B6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker.
Compare all specifications:
| 1992 Alpina B6 | 2000 Chevrolet Tracker | |
| Make | Alpina | Chevrolet |
| Model | B6 | Tracker |
| Year Released | 1992 | 2000 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2752 cc | 1590 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 238 HP | 97 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5900 RPM | 5200 RPM |
| Torque | 293 Nm | 139 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4700 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 4440 mm | 4140 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1720 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1690 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2710 mm | 2210 mm |
