2004 Buick Rainier vs. 2013 Lotus Evora
To start off, 2013 Lotus Evora is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Buick Rainier. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Buick Rainier would be higher. In terms of performance, 2013 Lotus Evora (345 HP @ 7000 RPM) has 69 more horse power than 2004 Buick Rainier. (276 HP @ 5200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Lotus Evora should accelerate faster than 2004 Buick Rainier. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Buick Rainier weights approximately 659 kg more than 2013 Lotus Evora.
Because 2004 Buick Rainier is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2013 Lotus Evora. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Buick Rainier 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, 2013 Lotus Evora (400 Nm) has 20 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Buick Rainier. (380 Nm). This means 2013 Lotus Evora will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Buick Rainier.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Buick Rainier | 2013 Lotus Evora | |
| Make | Buick | Lotus |
| Model | Rainier | Evora |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2013 |
| Body Type | SUV | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Middle |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 276 HP | 345 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 7000 RPM |
| Torque | 380 Nm | 400 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 93 mm | 94 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 102 mm | 83 mm |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 2099 kg | 1440 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4880 mm | 4361 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1920 mm | 2047 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1900 mm | 1229 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2880 mm | 2575 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 11.2 L/100km | 7.5 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 15.7 L/100km | 14.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 83 L | 60 L |
