2004 Bristol Fighter vs. 2000 Chevrolet Camaro
To start off, 2004 Bristol Fighter is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Chevrolet Camaro. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Chevrolet Camaro would be higher. At 7,994 cc (10 cylinders), 2004 Bristol Fighter is equipped with a bigger engine.
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, 2004 Bristol Fighter (787 Nm) has 319 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Chevrolet Camaro. (468 Nm). This means 2004 Bristol Fighter will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Chevrolet Camaro.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Bristol Fighter | 2000 Chevrolet Camaro | |
| Make | Bristol | Chevrolet |
| Model | Fighter | Camaro |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2000 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 7994 cc | 5670 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 10 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 660 HP | 0 HP |
| Torque | 787 Nm | 468 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1540 kg | 1540 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4430 mm | 4910 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1890 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1330 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2760 mm | 2570 mm |
