1997 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 1968 Ford GT 40
To start off, 1997 Chevrolet Camaro is newer by 29 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1968 Ford GT 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1968 Ford GT 40 would be higher. At 5,665 cc (8 cylinders), 1997 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1997 Chevrolet Camaro weights approximately 564 kg more than 1968 Ford GT 40.
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, 1968 Ford GT 40 (637 Nm) has 169 more torque (in Nm) than 1997 Chevrolet Camaro. (468 Nm). This means 1968 Ford GT 40 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1997 Chevrolet Camaro.
Compare all specifications:
| 1997 Chevrolet Camaro | 1968 Ford GT 40 | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Ford |
| Model | Camaro | GT 40 |
| Year Released | 1997 | 1968 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Middle |
| Engine Size | 5665 cc | 4948 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 424 HP |
| Torque | 468 Nm | 637 Nm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.1:1 | 10.5:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1524 kg | 960 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4920 mm | 4350 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1800 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1890 mm | 980 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2690 mm | 2420 mm |
