2004 Chevrolet Tracker vs. 2012 Holden Epica
To start off, 2012 Holden Epica is newer by 8 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 2,491 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Chevrolet Tracker is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Chevrolet Tracker (165 HP) has 17 more horse power than 2012 Holden Epica. (148 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Chevrolet Tracker should accelerate faster than 2012 Holden Epica.
Because 2004 Chevrolet Tracker is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2012 Holden Epica. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Chevrolet Tracker 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, 2012 Holden Epica (320 Nm) has 99 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. (221 Nm). This means 2012 Holden Epica will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Chevrolet Tracker | 2012 Holden Epica | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Holden |
| Model | Tracker | Epica |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2012 |
| Body Type | SUV | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2491 cc | 1991 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 165 HP | 148 HP |
| Torque | 221 Nm | 320 Nm |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4140 mm | 4805 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1810 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1690 mm | 1450 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2660 mm | 2700 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.8 L/100km | 7.5 L/100km |
