1999 Chevrolet Tracker vs. 1967 Ford GT 40
To start off, 1999 Chevrolet Tracker is newer by 32 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1967 Ford GT 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1967 Ford GT 40 would be higher. At 4,195 cc (8 cylinders), 1967 Ford GT 40 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1967 Ford GT 40 (350 HP @ 7200 RPM) has 253 more horse power than 1999 Chevrolet Tracker. (97 HP @ 5200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1967 Ford GT 40 should accelerate faster than 1999 Chevrolet Tracker.
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, 1999 Chevrolet Tracker (139 Nm) has 54 more torque (in Nm) than 1967 Ford GT 40. (85 Nm). This means 1999 Chevrolet Tracker will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1967 Ford GT 40.
Compare all specifications:
1999 Chevrolet Tracker | 1967 Ford GT 40 | |
Make | Chevrolet | Ford |
Model | Tracker | GT 40 |
Year Released | 1999 | 1967 |
Body Type | SUV | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Middle |
Engine Size | 1590 cc | 4195 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 97 HP | 350 HP |
Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 7200 RPM |
Torque | 139 Nm | 85 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
Vehicle Length | 4140 mm | 4300 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1780 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1690 mm | 1050 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2210 mm | 2430 mm |