2004 Mazda Tribute vs. 2013 Chevrolet Equinox
To start off, 2013 Chevrolet Equinox is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Mazda Tribute. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Mazda Tribute would be higher. At 2,966 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Mazda Tribute is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Mazda Tribute (201 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 21 more horse power than 2013 Chevrolet Equinox. (180 HP @ 6700 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Mazda Tribute should accelerate faster than 2013 Chevrolet Equinox. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Chevrolet Equinox weights approximately 274 kg more than 2004 Mazda Tribute.
Let's talk about torque, 2004 Mazda Tribute (266 Nm) has 33 more torque (in Nm) than 2013 Chevrolet Equinox. (233 Nm). This means 2004 Mazda Tribute will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2013 Chevrolet Equinox.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Mazda Tribute | 2013 Chevrolet Equinox | |
Make | Mazda | Chevrolet |
Model | Tribute | Equinox |
Year Released | 2004 | 2013 |
Body Type | SUV | Crossover |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2966 cc | 2400 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 201 HP | 180 HP |
Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 6700 RPM |
Torque | 266 Nm | 233 Nm |
Engine Bore Size | 89 mm | 88 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 80 mm | 98 mm |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1506 kg | 1780 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4400 mm | 4771 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1830 mm | 1842 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1780 mm | 1760 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2630 mm | 2857 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.6 L/100km | 6.9 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 12.5 L/100km | 10.1 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 62 L | 71 L |