2002 Chevrolet Tracker vs. 2013 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2013 Ford Mustang is newer by 11 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 3,700 cc (6 cylinders), 2013 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Ford Mustang (301 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 204 more horse power than 2002 Chevrolet Tracker. (97 HP @ 5200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Ford Mustang 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, 2013 Ford Mustang (380 Nm @ 4250 RPM) has 241 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 Chevrolet Tracker. (139 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2013 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 Chevrolet Tracker.
Compare all specifications:
2002 Chevrolet Tracker | 2013 Ford Mustang | |
Make | Chevrolet | Ford |
Model | Tracker | Mustang |
Year Released | 2002 | 2013 |
Body Type | SUV | Convertible |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1590 cc | 3700 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 97 HP | 301 HP |
Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 6500 RPM |
Torque | 139 Nm | 380 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 4250 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Vehicle Length | 3860 mm | 4778 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 2035 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1700 mm | 1425 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2210 mm | 2720 mm |