2004 Chevrolet Tracker vs. 2000 Chrysler ESX 3
To start off, 2004 Chevrolet Tracker is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Chrysler ESX 3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 would be higher. At 2,491 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Chevrolet Tracker is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Chevrolet Tracker (165 HP @ 5600 RPM) has 91 more horse power than 2000 Chrysler ESX 3. (74 HP @ 6400 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Chevrolet Tracker should accelerate faster than 2000 Chrysler ESX 3. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 weights approximately 320 kg more than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker.
Let's talk about torque, 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 (332 Nm) has 111 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. (221 Nm). This means 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Chevrolet Tracker | 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Chrysler |
| Model | Tracker | ESX 3 |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2000 |
| Body Type | SUV | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2491 cc | 1499 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 165 HP | 74 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 6400 RPM |
| Torque | 221 Nm | 332 Nm |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1300 kg | 1620 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4140 mm | 4910 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1890 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1670 mm | 1400 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2490 mm | 3000 mm |
