2000 Chevrolet Tracker vs. 1960 Mercedes-Benz 300
To start off, 2000 Chevrolet Tracker is newer by 40 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1960 Mercedes-Benz 300. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1960 Mercedes-Benz 300 would be higher. At 2,996 cc (6 cylinders), 1960 Mercedes-Benz 300 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1960 Mercedes-Benz 300 (238 HP @ 5800 RPM) has 141 more horse power than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker. (97 HP @ 5200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1960 Mercedes-Benz 300 should accelerate faster than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker.
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, 1960 Mercedes-Benz 300 (271 Nm @ 4600 RPM) has 132 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker. (139 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 1960 Mercedes-Benz 300 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker.
Compare all specifications:
2000 Chevrolet Tracker | 1960 Mercedes-Benz 300 | |
Make | Chevrolet | Mercedes-Benz |
Model | Tracker | 300 |
Year Released | 2000 | 1960 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1590 cc | 2996 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 97 HP | 238 HP |
Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 5800 RPM |
Torque | 139 Nm | 271 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 4600 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
Vehicle Length | 4140 mm | 4530 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1800 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1690 mm | 1310 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2210 mm | 2410 mm |