2002 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 1999 Mercury Tracer
To start off, 2002 Chevrolet Camaro is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1999 Mercury Tracer. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1999 Mercury Tracer would be higher. At 5,700 cc (8 cylinders), 2002 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1999 Mercury Tracer weights approximately 234 kg more than 2002 Chevrolet Camaro.
Because 2002 Chevrolet Camaro 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 Chevrolet Camaro. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1999 Mercury Tracer, 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, 2002 Chevrolet Camaro (454 Nm) has 284 more torque (in Nm) than 1999 Mercury Tracer. (170 Nm). This means 2002 Chevrolet Camaro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1999 Mercury Tracer.
Compare all specifications:
| 2002 Chevrolet Camaro | 1999 Mercury Tracer | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Mercury |
| Model | Camaro | Tracer |
| Year Released | 2002 | 1999 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5700 cc | 1999 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 320 HP | 0 HP |
| Torque | 454 Nm | 170 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 4 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1500 kg | 1734 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4910 mm | 4440 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1710 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1310 mm | 1360 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2570 mm | 2510 mm |
