2004 Chevrolet Tracker vs. 2000 Ford Puma
To start off, 2004 Chevrolet Tracker is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Ford Puma. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Ford Puma 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 12 more horse power than 2000 Ford Puma. (153 HP @ 7000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Chevrolet Tracker should accelerate faster than 2000 Ford Puma. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Chevrolet Tracker weights approximately 25 kg more than 2000 Ford Puma. 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 Tracker (221 Nm) has 51 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Ford Puma. (170 Nm). This means 2004 Chevrolet Tracker will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Ford Puma.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Chevrolet Tracker | 2000 Ford Puma | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Ford |
| Model | Tracker | Puma |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2000 |
| Body Type | SUV | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2491 cc | 1679 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 165 HP | 153 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 7000 RPM |
| Torque | 221 Nm | 170 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 84 mm | 80 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 75 mm | 83.5 mm |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1300 kg | 1275 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4140 mm | 3990 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1670 mm | 1320 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2490 mm | 2450 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 61 L | 42 L |
