1997 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 2004 Toyota Tundra
To start off, 2004 Toyota Tundra is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1997 Chevrolet Camaro. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1997 Chevrolet Camaro 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. 2004 Toyota Tundra weights approximately 256 kg more than 1997 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, 1997 Chevrolet Camaro (468 Nm) has 170 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Toyota Tundra. (298 Nm). This means 1997 Chevrolet Camaro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Toyota Tundra.
Compare all specifications:
1997 Chevrolet Camaro | 2004 Toyota Tundra | |
Make | Chevrolet | Toyota |
Model | Camaro | Tundra |
Year Released | 1997 | 2004 |
Body Type | Coupe | Pickup |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5665 cc | 3376 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 190 HP |
Torque | 468 Nm | 298 Nm |
Engine Bore Size | 99.1 mm | 93 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 91.4 mm | 82 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 10.1:1 | 9.6:1 |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 3 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1524 kg | 1780 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4920 mm | 5530 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1920 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1890 mm | 1800 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2690 mm | 3270 mm |