2002 Chevrolet Tracker vs. 2006 Mazda 3
To start off, 2006 Mazda 3 is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Chevrolet Tracker. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Chevrolet Tracker would be higher. At 1,998 cc, 2006 Mazda 3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Mazda 3 (139 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 42 more horse power than 2002 Chevrolet Tracker. (97 HP @ 5200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Mazda 3 should accelerate faster than 2002 Chevrolet Tracker.
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, 2006 Mazda 3 (182 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 43 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 Chevrolet Tracker. (139 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2006 Mazda 3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 Chevrolet Tracker.
Compare all specifications:
| 2002 Chevrolet Tracker | 2006 Mazda 3 | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Mazda |
| Model | Tracker | 3 |
| Year Released | 2002 | 2006 |
| Body Type | SUV | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1590 cc | 1998 cc |
| Horse Power | 97 HP | 139 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 6500 RPM |
| Torque | 139 Nm | 182 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 3860 mm | 4710 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1700 mm | 1490 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2210 mm | 2650 mm |
