2004 Chevrolet Tracker vs. 2013 Volvo C30
To start off, 2013 Volvo C30 is newer by 9 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 2,500 cc (5 cylinders), 2013 Volvo C30 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Volvo C30 (224 HP @ 5000 RPM) has 59 more horse power than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. (165 HP @ 5600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Volvo C30 should accelerate faster than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Volvo C30 weights approximately 157 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, 2013 Volvo C30 (320 Nm) has 99 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. (221 Nm). This means 2013 Volvo C30 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Chevrolet Tracker | 2013 Volvo C30 | |
Make | Chevrolet | Volvo |
Model | Tracker | C30 |
Year Released | 2004 | 2013 |
Body Type | SUV | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2491 cc | 2500 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 5 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 5 valves |
Horse Power | 165 HP | 224 HP |
Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 5000 RPM |
Torque | 221 Nm | 320 Nm |
Engine Bore Size | 84 mm | 83 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 75 mm | 93 mm |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1300 kg | 1457 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4140 mm | 4266 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 2039 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1670 mm | 1447 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2490 mm | 2640 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 10.7 L/100km | 6.8 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 12.4 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |