2004 Chevrolet Tracker vs. 2012 Jeep Wrangler
To start off, 2012 Jeep Wrangler 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 3,600 cc (6 cylinders), 2012 Jeep Wrangler is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Jeep Wrangler (285 HP @ 6400 RPM) has 120 more horse power than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. (165 HP @ 5600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Jeep Wrangler should accelerate faster than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2012 Jeep Wrangler weights approximately 636 kg more than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2012 Jeep Wrangler (352 Nm) has 131 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. (221 Nm). This means 2012 Jeep Wrangler will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Chevrolet Tracker | 2012 Jeep Wrangler | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Jeep |
| Model | Tracker | Wrangler |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2012 |
| Body Type | SUV | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2491 cc | 3600 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 165 HP | 285 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 6400 RPM |
| Torque | 221 Nm | 352 Nm |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1300 kg | 1936 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4140 mm | 4404 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1877 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2490 mm | 2946 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 10.7 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 12.4 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 61 L | 85 L |
