1996 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 2008 Opel Meriva
To start off, 2008 Opel Meriva is newer by 12 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 3,349 cc (6 cylinders), 1996 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1996 Chevrolet Camaro weights approximately 38 kg more than 2008 Opel Meriva.
Because 1996 Chevrolet Camaro is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 1996 Chevrolet Camaro. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2008 Opel Meriva, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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:
1996 Chevrolet Camaro | 2008 Opel Meriva | |
Make | Chevrolet | Opel |
Model | Camaro | Meriva |
Year Released | 1996 | 2008 |
Body Type | Coupe | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3349 cc | 1598 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 158 HP | 0 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1413 kg | 1375 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4910 mm | 4060 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1700 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1310 mm | 1630 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2450 mm | 2640 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 14 L/100km | 6.7 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 53 L |