2005 Audi TT vs. 2000 Chevrolet Tracker
To start off, 2005 Audi TT is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Chevrolet Tracker. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Chevrolet Tracker would be higher. At 1,786 cc (4 cylinders), 2005 Audi TT is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Audi TT (180 HP @ 6300 RPM) has 83 more horse power than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker. (97 HP @ 5200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2005 Audi TT should accelerate faster than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker.
Because 2000 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 2000 Chevrolet Tracker. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 Audi TT, 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, 2005 Audi TT (235 Nm) has 96 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker. (139 Nm). This means 2005 Audi TT will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Chevrolet Tracker.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Audi TT | 2000 Chevrolet Tracker | |
| Make | Audi | Chevrolet |
| Model | TT | Tracker |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2000 |
| Body Type | Coupe | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1786 cc | 1590 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 5 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 180 HP | 97 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6300 RPM | 5200 RPM |
| Torque | 235 Nm | 139 Nm |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 4050 mm | 4140 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1720 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1690 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2210 mm |
