1999 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 1969 Triumph 2000
To start off, 1999 Chevrolet Malibu is newer by 30 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1969 Triumph 2000. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1969 Triumph 2000 would be higher. At 2,399 cc (4 cylinders), 1999 Chevrolet Malibu is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1999 Chevrolet Malibu weights approximately 236 kg more than 1969 Triumph 2000.
Because 1969 Triumph 2000 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 1969 Triumph 2000. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1999 Chevrolet Malibu, 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. Let's talk about torque, 1999 Chevrolet Malibu (203 Nm) has 45 more torque (in Nm) than 1969 Triumph 2000. (158 Nm). This means 1999 Chevrolet Malibu will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1969 Triumph 2000.
Compare all specifications:
| 1999 Chevrolet Malibu | 1969 Triumph 2000 | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Triumph |
| Model | Malibu | 2000 |
| Year Released | 1999 | 1969 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2399 cc | 1998 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 89 HP |
| Torque | 203 Nm | 158 Nm |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1406 kg | 1170 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4840 mm | 4640 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1770 mm | 1660 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1440 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2720 mm | 2700 mm |
