2000 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 2013 Mini Countryman
To start off, 2013 Mini Countryman is newer by 13 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. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Chevrolet Camaro weights approximately 155 kg more than 2013 Mini Countryman.
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, 2013 Mini Countryman, 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 (468 Nm) has 228 more torque (in Nm) than 2013 Mini Countryman. (240 Nm). This means 2000 Chevrolet Camaro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2013 Mini Countryman.
Compare all specifications:
2000 Chevrolet Camaro | 2013 Mini Countryman | |
Make | Chevrolet | Mini |
Model | Camaro | Countryman |
Year Released | 2000 | 2013 |
Body Type | Coupe | Crossover |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 0 HP |
Torque | 468 Nm | 240 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed manual |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1540 kg | 1385 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4910 mm | 4110 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1996 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1330 mm | 1561 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2570 mm | 2595 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 57 L | 47 L |