2000 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 2011 Holden Epica
To start off, 2011 Holden Epica is newer by 11 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Chevrolet Camaro. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Chevrolet Camaro would be higher. At 5,670 cc (8 cylinders), 2000 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine.
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, 2011 Holden Epica, 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 217 more torque (in Nm) than 2011 Holden Epica. (237 Nm). This means 2000 Chevrolet Camaro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2011 Holden Epica.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Chevrolet Camaro | 2011 Holden Epica | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Holden |
| Model | Camaro | Epica |
| Year Released | 2000 | 2011 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5670 cc | 2492 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 153 HP |
| Torque | 454 Nm | 237 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4910 mm | 4805 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1810 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1310 mm | 1450 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2570 mm | 2700 mm |
