2003 Chevrolet Tracker vs. 1996 Mazda RX-7
To start off, 2003 Chevrolet Tracker is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Mazda RX-7. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Mazda RX-7 would be higher. At 2,616 cc, 1996 Mazda RX-7 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1996 Mazda RX-7 (238 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 141 more horse power than 2003 Chevrolet Tracker. (97 HP @ 5200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1996 Mazda RX-7 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, 1996 Mazda RX-7 (296 Nm @ 5000 RPM) has 157 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Chevrolet Tracker. (139 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 1996 Mazda RX-7 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Chevrolet Tracker.
Compare all specifications:
2003 Chevrolet Tracker | 1996 Mazda RX-7 | |
Make | Chevrolet | Mazda |
Model | Tracker | RX-7 |
Year Released | 2003 | 1996 |
Body Type | SUV | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1590 cc | 2616 cc |
Engine Type | in-line | dual-disk rotary |
Horse Power | 97 HP | 238 HP |
Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 6500 RPM |
Torque | 139 Nm | 296 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 5000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
Vehicle Length | 3860 mm | 4290 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1770 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1700 mm | 1240 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2210 mm | 2430 mm |