2004 Chevrolet Tracker vs. 2010 Citroen C-Crosser
To start off, 2010 Citroen C-Crosser is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Chevrolet Tracker would be higher. At 2,179 cc (4 cylinders), 2010 Citroen C-Crosser is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Citroen C-Crosser (154 HP) has 57 more horse power than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. (97 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Citroen C-Crosser should accelerate faster than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker.
Because 2010 Citroen C-Crosser is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Citroen C-Crosser 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, 2010 Citroen C-Crosser (380 Nm) has 241 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. (139 Nm). This means 2010 Citroen C-Crosser will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Chevrolet Tracker | 2010 Citroen C-Crosser | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Citroen |
| Model | Tracker | C-Crosser |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2010 |
| Body Type | SUV | Crossover |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1590 cc | 2179 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 97 HP | 154 HP |
| Torque | 139 Nm | 380 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 84.1 mm | 85 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 75 mm | 96 mm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
