2004 Chevrolet Astro vs. 1992 Mazda RX-7
To start off, 2004 Chevrolet Astro is newer by 12 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1992 Mazda RX-7. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1992 Mazda RX-7 would be higher. At 4,294 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Chevrolet Astro is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1992 Mazda RX-7 (197 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 7 more horse power than 2004 Chevrolet Astro. (190 HP @ 5600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1992 Mazda RX-7 should accelerate faster than 2004 Chevrolet Astro. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Chevrolet Astro weights approximately 655 kg more than 1992 Mazda RX-7.
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 Chevrolet Astro (339 Nm) has 69 more torque (in Nm) than 1992 Mazda RX-7. (270 Nm). This means 2004 Chevrolet Astro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1992 Mazda RX-7.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Chevrolet Astro | 1992 Mazda RX-7 | |
Make | Chevrolet | Mazda |
Model | Astro | RX-7 |
Year Released | 2004 | 1992 |
Body Type | Minivan | Convertible |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4294 cc | 2615 cc |
Engine Type | V | dual-disk rotary |
Horse Power | 190 HP | 197 HP |
Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 6500 RPM |
Torque | 339 Nm | 270 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 8 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 3 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1955 kg | 1300 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4830 mm | 4320 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1980 mm | 1700 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1910 mm | 1270 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2630 mm | 2430 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 102 L | 75 L |