2003 Chevrolet Tracker vs. 1967 Jaguar 240
To start off, 2003 Chevrolet Tracker is newer by 36 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1967 Jaguar 240. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1967 Jaguar 240 would be higher. At 2,482 cc (6 cylinders), 1967 Jaguar 240 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1967 Jaguar 240 (131 HP @ 5550 RPM) has 34 more horse power than 2003 Chevrolet Tracker. (97 HP @ 5200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1967 Jaguar 240 should accelerate faster than 2003 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, 1967 Jaguar 240 (203 Nm @ 3700 RPM) has 64 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Chevrolet Tracker. (139 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 1967 Jaguar 240 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Chevrolet Tracker.
Compare all specifications:
| 2003 Chevrolet Tracker | 1967 Jaguar 240 | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Jaguar |
| Model | Tracker | 240 |
| Year Released | 2003 | 1967 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1590 cc | 2482 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 97 HP | 131 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 5550 RPM |
| Torque | 139 Nm | 203 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 3700 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Length | 3860 mm | 4600 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1700 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1700 mm | 1470 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2210 mm | 2740 mm |
