2000 Chevrolet Tracker vs. 1978 Mitsubishi Celeste
To start off, 2000 Chevrolet Tracker is newer by 22 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1978 Mitsubishi Celeste. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1978 Mitsubishi Celeste 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) has 23 more horse power than 1978 Mitsubishi Celeste. (74 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2000 Chevrolet Tracker should accelerate faster than 1978 Mitsubishi Celeste.
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 21 more torque (in Nm) than 1978 Mitsubishi Celeste. (118 Nm @ 3500 RPM). This means 2000 Chevrolet Tracker will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1978 Mitsubishi Celeste.
Compare all specifications:
2000 Chevrolet Tracker | 1978 Mitsubishi Celeste | |
Make | Chevrolet | Mitsubishi |
Model | Tracker | Celeste |
Year Released | 2000 | 1978 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1590 cc | 1410 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 97 HP | 74 HP |
Torque | 139 Nm | 118 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 3500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Vehicle Length | 4140 mm | 4160 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1620 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1690 mm | 1350 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2210 mm | 2350 mm |