2003 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 1982 Zastava 2101

To start off, 2003 Chevrolet Malibu is newer by 21 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Zastava 2101. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Zastava 2101 would be higher. At 3,500 cc (6 cylinders), 2003 Chevrolet Malibu is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Chevrolet Malibu (200 HP @ 5400 RPM) has 138 more horse power than 1982 Zastava 2101. (62 HP @ 5600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2003 Chevrolet Malibu should accelerate faster than 1982 Zastava 2101. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Chevrolet Malibu weights approximately 609 kg more than 1982 Zastava 2101. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.

Because 1982 Zastava 2101 is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 1982 Zastava 2101. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Chevrolet Malibu, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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 Chevrolet Malibu (298 Nm @ 3200 RPM) has 211 more torque (in Nm) than 1982 Zastava 2101. (87 Nm @ 3400 RPM). This means 2003 Chevrolet Malibu will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1982 Zastava 2101. 2003 Chevrolet Malibu has automatic transmission and 1982 Zastava 2101 has manual transmission. 1982 Zastava 2101 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2003 Chevrolet Malibu will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.

Compare all specifications: