2003 Chevrolet Tracker vs. 1966 Opel Rekord
To start off, 2003 Chevrolet Tracker is newer by 37 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Opel Rekord. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Opel Rekord would be higher. At 1,895 cc (4 cylinders), 1966 Opel Rekord is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Chevrolet Tracker (97 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 9 more horse power than 1966 Opel Rekord. (88 HP @ 5400 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2003 Chevrolet Tracker should accelerate faster than 1966 Opel Rekord.
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, 1966 Opel Rekord (146 Nm @ 2800 RPM) has 7 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Chevrolet Tracker. (139 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 1966 Opel Rekord will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Chevrolet Tracker.
Compare all specifications:
2003 Chevrolet Tracker | 1966 Opel Rekord | |
Make | Chevrolet | Opel |
Model | Tracker | Rekord |
Year Released | 2003 | 1966 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1590 cc | 1895 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 97 HP | 88 HP |
Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 5400 RPM |
Torque | 139 Nm | 146 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 2800 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Length | 3860 mm | 4560 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1760 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1700 mm | 1470 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2210 mm | 2670 mm |