2002 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 2004 Opel Omega
To start off, 2004 Opel Omega is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Chevrolet Camaro. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Chevrolet Camaro would be higher. At 5,700 cc (8 cylinders), 2002 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 Chevrolet Camaro (320 HP) has 178 more horse power than 2004 Opel Omega. (142 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2002 Chevrolet Camaro should accelerate faster than 2004 Opel Omega. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Opel Omega weights approximately 165 kg more than 2002 Chevrolet Camaro.
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, 2002 Chevrolet Camaro (454 Nm) has 245 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Opel Omega. (209 Nm). This means 2002 Chevrolet Camaro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Opel Omega.
Compare all specifications:
2002 Chevrolet Camaro | 2004 Opel Omega | |
Make | Chevrolet | Opel |
Model | Camaro | Omega |
Year Released | 2002 | 2004 |
Engine Position | Front | Middle |
Engine Size | 5700 cc | 2198 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 320 HP | 142 HP |
Torque | 454 Nm | 209 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1500 kg | 1665 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4910 mm | 4900 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1790 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1310 mm | 1510 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2570 mm | 2740 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 57 L | 75 L |