2000 Chevrolet Tracker vs. 2005 Suzuki Reno
To start off, 2005 Suzuki Reno is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Chevrolet Tracker. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Chevrolet Tracker would be higher. At 1,998 cc (4 cylinders), 2005 Suzuki Reno is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Suzuki Reno (126 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 29 more horse power than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker. (97 HP @ 5200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2005 Suzuki Reno should accelerate faster than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker.
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, 2005 Suzuki Reno, 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, 2005 Suzuki Reno (178 Nm) has 39 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker. (139 Nm). This means 2005 Suzuki Reno will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker.
Compare all specifications:
2000 Chevrolet Tracker | 2005 Suzuki Reno | |
Make | Chevrolet | Suzuki |
Model | Tracker | Reno |
Year Released | 2000 | 2005 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1590 cc | 1998 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 97 HP | 126 HP |
Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 139 Nm | 178 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Length | 4140 mm | 4300 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1730 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1690 mm | 1450 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2210 mm | 2610 mm |