2002 Chevrolet Tracker vs. 1964 Ford Anglia
To start off, 2002 Chevrolet Tracker is newer by 38 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Ford Anglia. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Ford Anglia would be higher. At 1,590 cc (4 cylinders), 2002 Chevrolet Tracker is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 Chevrolet Tracker (97 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 60 more horse power than 1964 Ford Anglia. (37 HP @ 5000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2002 Chevrolet Tracker should accelerate faster than 1964 Ford Anglia.
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 Tracker (139 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 69 more torque (in Nm) than 1964 Ford Anglia. (70 Nm @ 2700 RPM). This means 2002 Chevrolet Tracker will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1964 Ford Anglia.
Compare all specifications:
| 2002 Chevrolet Tracker | 1964 Ford Anglia | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Ford |
| Model | Tracker | Anglia |
| Year Released | 2002 | 1964 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1590 cc | 997 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 97 HP | 37 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 5000 RPM |
| Torque | 139 Nm | 70 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 2700 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 3860 mm | 3910 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1470 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1700 mm | 1450 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2210 mm | 2310 mm |
