2000 Chevrolet Tracker vs. 1998 Rover Mini
To start off, 2000 Chevrolet Tracker is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1998 Rover Mini. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1998 Rover Mini 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 35 more horse power than 1998 Rover Mini. (62 HP @ 4200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 Chevrolet Tracker should accelerate faster than 1998 Rover Mini.
Because 2000 Chevrolet Tracker 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 Tracker. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1998 Rover Mini, 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 Tracker (139 Nm) has 45 more torque (in Nm) than 1998 Rover Mini. (94 Nm). This means 2000 Chevrolet Tracker will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1998 Rover Mini.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Chevrolet Tracker | 1998 Rover Mini | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Rover |
| Model | Tracker | Mini |
| Year Released | 2000 | 1998 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1590 cc | 1275 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 97 HP | 62 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 4200 RPM |
| Torque | 139 Nm | 94 Nm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Wheelbase Size | 2210 mm | 2750 mm |
