2003 AC Cobra vs. 1982 Chevrolet Camaro
To start off, 2003 AC Cobra is newer by 21 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Chevrolet Camaro. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Chevrolet Camaro would be higher. At 4,995 cc (8 cylinders), 1982 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 AC Cobra (350 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 187 more horse power than 1982 Chevrolet Camaro. (163 HP @ 4200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2003 AC Cobra should accelerate faster than 1982 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, 2003 AC Cobra (400 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 75 more torque (in Nm) than 1982 Chevrolet Camaro. (325 Nm @ 2400 RPM). This means 2003 AC Cobra will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1982 Chevrolet Camaro.
Compare all specifications:
2003 AC Cobra | 1982 Chevrolet Camaro | |
Make | AC | Chevrolet |
Model | Cobra | Camaro |
Year Released | 2003 | 1982 |
Body Type | Roadster | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3506 cc | 4995 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Horse Power | 350 HP | 163 HP |
Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 4200 RPM |
Torque | 400 Nm | 325 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 2400 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 83 mm | 94.9 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 81 mm | 88.4 mm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4210 mm | 4880 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1750 mm | 1860 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1210 mm | 1290 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2300 mm | 2570 mm |