2004 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 1965 Triumph 2000
To start off, 2004 Chevrolet Malibu is newer by 39 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 Triumph 2000. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 Triumph 2000 would be higher. At 3,491 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Chevrolet Malibu is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Chevrolet Malibu (200 HP) has 111 more horse power than 1965 Triumph 2000. (89 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Chevrolet Malibu should accelerate faster than 1965 Triumph 2000. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Chevrolet Malibu weights approximately 334 kg more than 1965 Triumph 2000. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2004 Chevrolet Malibu (298 Nm) has 140 more torque (in Nm) than 1965 Triumph 2000. (158 Nm). This means 2004 Chevrolet Malibu will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1965 Triumph 2000.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Chevrolet Malibu | 1965 Triumph 2000 | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Triumph |
| Model | Malibu | 2000 |
| Year Released | 2004 | 1965 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3491 cc | 1997 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 200 HP | 89 HP |
| Torque | 298 Nm | 158 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 94 mm | 74.7 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 84 mm | 76 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.8:1 | 9.3:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1504 kg | 1170 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4780 mm | 4420 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1660 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1480 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2950 mm | 2700 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 61 L | 64 L |
