2004 Audi A6 vs. 2000 Chevrolet Tracker
To start off, 2004 Audi A6 is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Chevrolet Tracker. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Chevrolet Tracker would be higher. At 2,494 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Audi A6 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Audi A6 (168 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 71 more horse power than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker. (97 HP @ 5200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Audi A6 should accelerate faster than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker.
Because 2004 Audi A6 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Audi A6 will offer significantly more control. 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, 2004 Audi A6 (230 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 91 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker. (139 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2004 Audi A6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Audi A6 | 2000 Chevrolet Tracker | |
Make | Audi | Chevrolet |
Model | A6 | Tracker |
Year Released | 2004 | 2000 |
Body Type | Station Wagon | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2494 cc | 1590 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 168 HP | 97 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5200 RPM |
Torque | 230 Nm | 139 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline - Premium | Gasoline |
Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Length | 4800 mm | 4140 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1820 mm | 1720 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1690 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2660 mm | 2210 mm |