2000 Chevrolet Tracker vs. 1960 Fairthorpe Electron
To start off, 2000 Chevrolet Tracker is newer by 40 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1960 Fairthorpe Electron. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1960 Fairthorpe Electron would be higher. At 1,590 cc (4 cylinders), 2000 Chevrolet Tracker is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Chevrolet Tracker (97 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 55 more horse power than 1960 Fairthorpe Electron. (42 HP @ 4500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 Chevrolet Tracker should accelerate faster than 1960 Fairthorpe Electron.
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 Tracker (139 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 73 more torque (in Nm) than 1960 Fairthorpe Electron. (66 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2000 Chevrolet Tracker will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1960 Fairthorpe Electron.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Chevrolet Tracker | 1960 Fairthorpe Electron | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Fairthorpe |
| Model | Tracker | Electron |
| Year Released | 2000 | 1960 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1590 cc | 948 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 97 HP | 42 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Torque | 139 Nm | 66 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 3000 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 4140 mm | 3360 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1480 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1690 mm | 1180 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2210 mm | 2060 mm |
