2000 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 1968 Triumph Spitfire
To start off, 2000 Chevrolet Camaro is newer by 32 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1968 Triumph Spitfire. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1968 Triumph Spitfire would be higher. At 5,670 cc (8 cylinders), 2000 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Chevrolet Camaro weights approximately 438 kg more than 1968 Triumph Spitfire.
Because 2000 Chevrolet Camaro 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 2000 Chevrolet Camaro. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1968 Triumph Spitfire, 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, 2000 Chevrolet Camaro (454 Nm) has 350 more torque (in Nm) than 1968 Triumph Spitfire. (104 Nm). This means 2000 Chevrolet Camaro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1968 Triumph Spitfire.
Compare all specifications:
2000 Chevrolet Camaro | 1968 Triumph Spitfire | |
Make | Chevrolet | Triumph |
Model | Camaro | Spitfire |
Year Released | 2000 | 1968 |
Body Type | Coupe | Convertible |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5670 cc | 1296 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 75 HP |
Torque | 454 Nm | 104 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 2 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1188 kg | 750 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4910 mm | 3740 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1450 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1310 mm | 1210 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2570 mm | 2110 mm |