2003 Chevrolet Tracker vs. 1999 Ford Econoline
To start off, 2003 Chevrolet Tracker is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1999 Ford Econoline. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1999 Ford Econoline would be higher. At 6,801 cc (10 cylinders), 1999 Ford Econoline is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1999 Ford Econoline (302 HP @ 4250 RPM) has 205 more horse power than 2003 Chevrolet Tracker. (97 HP @ 5200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1999 Ford Econoline 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, 1999 Ford Econoline (569 Nm @ 3250 RPM) has 430 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Chevrolet Tracker. (139 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 1999 Ford Econoline will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Chevrolet Tracker.
Compare all specifications:
| 2003 Chevrolet Tracker | 1999 Ford Econoline | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Ford |
| Model | Tracker | Econoline |
| Year Released | 2003 | 1999 |
| Body Type | SUV | Van |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1590 cc | 6801 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 10 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 97 HP | 302 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 4250 RPM |
| Torque | 139 Nm | 569 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 3250 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Vehicle Length | 3860 mm | 5390 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 2020 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1700 mm | 2060 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2210 mm | 3510 mm |
