1996 Chevrolet Tracker vs. 2004 Mazda 3
To start off, 2004 Mazda 3 is newer by 8 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Chevrolet Tracker. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Chevrolet Tracker would be higher. At 1,998 cc (4 cylinders), 2004 Mazda 3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Mazda 3 (144 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 48 more horse power than 1996 Chevrolet Tracker. (96 HP @ 5200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2004 Mazda 3 should accelerate faster than 1996 Chevrolet Tracker. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1996 Chevrolet Tracker weights approximately 7 kg more than 2004 Mazda 3.
Because 1996 Chevrolet Tracker is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2004 Mazda 3. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1996 Chevrolet Tracker will offer significantly more control. 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, 2004 Mazda 3 (184 Nm) has 45 more torque (in Nm) than 1996 Chevrolet Tracker. (139 Nm). This means 2004 Mazda 3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1996 Chevrolet Tracker.
Compare all specifications:
| 1996 Chevrolet Tracker | 2004 Mazda 3 | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Mazda |
| Model | Tracker | 3 |
| Year Released | 1996 | 2004 |
| Body Type | SUV | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1589 cc | 1998 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 96 HP | 144 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Torque | 139 Nm | 184 Nm |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
| Vehicle Weight | 1230 kg | 1223 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3860 mm | 4540 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1760 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1700 mm | 1470 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2210 mm | 2760 mm |
