2005 Chevrolet Tracker vs. 1968 Mazda Cosmo
To start off, 2005 Chevrolet Tracker is newer by 37 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1968 Mazda Cosmo. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1968 Mazda Cosmo would be higher. At 1,964 cc, 1968 Mazda Cosmo is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Chevrolet Tracker (98 HP) has 4 more horse power than 1968 Mazda Cosmo. (94 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2005 Chevrolet Tracker should accelerate faster than 1968 Mazda Cosmo.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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 Chevrolet Tracker (139 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 6 more torque (in Nm) than 1968 Mazda Cosmo. (133 Nm @ 3500 RPM). This means 2005 Chevrolet Tracker will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1968 Mazda Cosmo.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Chevrolet Tracker | 1968 Mazda Cosmo | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Mazda |
| Model | Tracker | Cosmo |
| Year Released | 2005 | 1968 |
| Body Type | SUV | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1590 cc | 1964 cc |
| Engine Type | in-line | dual-disk rotary |
| Horse Power | 98 HP | 94 HP |
| Torque | 139 Nm | 133 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 3500 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 3860 mm | 4150 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1600 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1700 mm | 1170 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2210 mm | 2210 mm |
