2000 Chevrolet Astro vs. 1976 Ford Falcon
To start off, 2000 Chevrolet Astro is newer by 24 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1976 Ford Falcon. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1976 Ford Falcon would be higher. At 4,300 cc (6 cylinders), 2000 Chevrolet Astro is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1976 Ford Falcon weights approximately 193 kg more than 2000 Chevrolet Astro.
Because 2000 Chevrolet Astro is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1976 Ford Falcon. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Chevrolet Astro will offer significantly more control. 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, 2000 Chevrolet Astro (339 Nm) has 14 more torque (in Nm) than 1976 Ford Falcon. (325 Nm). This means 2000 Chevrolet Astro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1976 Ford Falcon.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Chevrolet Astro | 1976 Ford Falcon | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Ford |
| Model | Astro | Falcon |
| Year Released | 2000 | 1976 |
| Body Type | Minivan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4300 cc | 4092 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 153 HP |
| Torque | 339 Nm | 325 Nm |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 8 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1187 kg | 1380 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4830 mm | 4870 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1980 mm | 1910 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1940 mm | 1420 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2790 mm | 2830 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 45 L |
