2004 Chevrolet Tracker vs. 2011 Renault Scenic
To start off, 2011 Renault Scenic is newer by 7 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 1,996 cc (4 cylinders), 2011 Renault Scenic is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2011 Renault Scenic (133 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 36 more horse power than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. (97 HP @ 5200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2011 Renault Scenic should accelerate faster than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Chevrolet Tracker weights approximately 103 kg more than 2011 Renault Scenic.
Because 2004 Chevrolet Tracker is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2011 Renault Scenic, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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, 2011 Renault Scenic (191 Nm @ 3750 RPM) has 52 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. (139 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2011 Renault Scenic will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. 2011 Renault Scenic has automatic transmission and 2004 Chevrolet Tracker has manual transmission. 2004 Chevrolet Tracker will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2011 Renault Scenic will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Chevrolet Tracker | 2011 Renault Scenic | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Renault |
| Model | Tracker | Scenic |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2011 |
| Body Type | SUV | Minivan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1590 cc | 1996 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 97 HP | 133 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Torque | 139 Nm | 191 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 3750 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 84.1 mm | 82.7 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 75 mm | 93 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.5:1 | 9.8:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1318 kg | 1215 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4140 mm | 4270 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1630 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1670 mm | 1820 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2210 mm | 2690 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.8 L/100km | 8 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 61 L | 60 L |
