2004 Audi A2 vs. 1982 Chevrolet Camaro
To start off, 2004 Audi A2 is newer by 22 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Chevrolet Camaro. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Chevrolet Camaro would be higher. At 2,835 cc (6 cylinders), 1982 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1982 Chevrolet Camaro (101 HP @ 4800 RPM) has 41 more horse power than 2004 Audi A2. (60 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1982 Chevrolet Camaro should accelerate faster than 2004 Audi A2.
Because 1982 Chevrolet Camaro 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 Chevrolet Camaro. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Audi A2, 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, 1982 Chevrolet Camaro (192 Nm @ 2400 RPM) has 52 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Audi A2. (140 Nm @ 1800 RPM). This means 1982 Chevrolet Camaro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Audi A2.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Audi A2 | 1982 Chevrolet Camaro | |
Make | Audi | Chevrolet |
Model | A2 | Camaro |
Year Released | 2004 | 1982 |
Body Type | Hatchback | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1190 cc | 2835 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 3 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 60 HP | 101 HP |
Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 4800 RPM |
Torque | 140 Nm | 192 Nm |
Torque RPM | 1800 RPM | 2400 RPM |
Fuel Type | Diesel | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Length | 3830 mm | 4880 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1680 mm | 1860 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2410 mm | 2580 mm |