1999 Chevrolet Tracker vs. 1980 Mitsubishi Sigma
To start off, 1999 Chevrolet Tracker is newer by 19 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1980 Mitsubishi Sigma. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1980 Mitsubishi Sigma would be higher. At 1,995 cc (4 cylinders), 1980 Mitsubishi Sigma is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1999 Chevrolet Tracker (97 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 11 more horse power than 1980 Mitsubishi Sigma. (86 HP @ 5200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1999 Chevrolet Tracker should accelerate faster than 1980 Mitsubishi Sigma.
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, 1980 Mitsubishi Sigma (145 Nm @ 2400 RPM) has 6 more torque (in Nm) than 1999 Chevrolet Tracker. (139 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 1980 Mitsubishi Sigma will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1999 Chevrolet Tracker.
Compare all specifications:
| 1999 Chevrolet Tracker | 1980 Mitsubishi Sigma | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Mitsubishi |
| Model | Tracker | Sigma |
| Year Released | 1999 | 1980 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1590 cc | 1995 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 97 HP | 86 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 5200 RPM |
| Torque | 139 Nm | 145 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 2400 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Length | 4140 mm | 4460 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1660 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1690 mm | 1370 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2210 mm | 2520 mm |
