2000 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 1969 ZAZ 966
To start off, 2000 Chevrolet Camaro is newer by 31 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1969 ZAZ 966. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1969 ZAZ 966 would be higher. At 9,371 cc (8 cylinders), 2000 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Chevrolet Camaro (770 HP) has 743 more horse power than 1969 ZAZ 966. (27 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2000 Chevrolet Camaro should accelerate faster than 1969 ZAZ 966. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Chevrolet Camaro weights approximately 447 kg more than 1969 ZAZ 966. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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, 2000 Chevrolet Camaro (926 Nm) has 874 more torque (in Nm) than 1969 ZAZ 966. (52 Nm). This means 2000 Chevrolet Camaro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1969 ZAZ 966.
Compare all specifications:
2000 Chevrolet Camaro | 1969 ZAZ 966 | |
Make | Chevrolet | ZAZ |
Model | Camaro | 966 |
Year Released | 2000 | 1969 |
Engine Position | Front | Rear |
Engine Size | 9371 cc | 887 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 770 HP | 27 HP |
Torque | 926 Nm | 52 Nm |
Engine Bore Size | 114.3 mm | 72.1 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 114.3 mm | 54.5 mm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1187 kg | 740 kg |
Vehicle Width | 1610 mm | 1540 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2570 mm | 2170 mm |