2002 Bristol Blenheim vs. 2009 Chevrolet Uplander
To start off, 2009 Chevrolet Uplander is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Bristol Blenheim. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Bristol Blenheim would be higher. At 5,900 cc (8 cylinders), 2002 Bristol Blenheim is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2002 Bristol Blenheim weights approximately 320 kg more than 2009 Chevrolet Uplander.
Because 2002 Bristol Blenheim 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 2002 Bristol Blenheim. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Chevrolet Uplander, 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2002 Bristol Blenheim | 2009 Chevrolet Uplander | |
| Make | Bristol | Chevrolet |
| Model | Blenheim | Uplander |
| Year Released | 2002 | 2009 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5900 cc | 3880 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 240 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 7 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1395 kg | 1075 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4680 mm | 5200 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1840 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1120 mm | 1840 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2900 mm | 3080 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 105 L | 95 L |
