1996 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 2003 Holden UTE
To start off, 2003 Holden UTE is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Chevrolet Camaro. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Chevrolet Camaro would be higher. At 6,276 cc (8 cylinders), 1996 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1996 Chevrolet Camaro (435 HP) has 231 more horse power than 2003 Holden UTE. (204 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1996 Chevrolet Camaro should accelerate faster than 2003 Holden UTE. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Holden UTE weights approximately 313 kg more than 1996 Chevrolet Camaro.
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, 1996 Chevrolet Camaro (576 Nm) has 271 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Holden UTE. (305 Nm). This means 1996 Chevrolet Camaro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Holden UTE.
Compare all specifications:
| 1996 Chevrolet Camaro | 2003 Holden UTE | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Holden |
| Model | Camaro | UTE |
| Year Released | 1996 | 2003 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Pickup |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6276 cc | 3791 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 435 HP | 204 HP |
| Torque | 576 Nm | 305 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1187 kg | 1500 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4910 mm | 5060 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1850 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1310 mm | 1490 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2570 mm | 2950 mm |
