2005 Suzuki Reno vs. 2013 Chevrolet Camaro
To start off, 2013 Chevrolet Camaro is newer by 8 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Suzuki Reno. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Suzuki Reno would be higher. At 6,200 cc (8 cylinders), 2013 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Chevrolet Camaro (420 HP @ 5900 RPM) has 294 more horse power than 2005 Suzuki Reno. (126 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Chevrolet Camaro should accelerate faster than 2005 Suzuki Reno. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Chevrolet Camaro weights approximately 489 kg more than 2005 Suzuki Reno. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2013 Chevrolet Camaro 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 2013 Chevrolet Camaro. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 Suzuki Reno, 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, 2013 Chevrolet Camaro (569 Nm) has 391 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Suzuki Reno. (178 Nm). This means 2013 Chevrolet Camaro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Suzuki Reno.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Suzuki Reno | 2013 Chevrolet Camaro | |
| Make | Suzuki | Chevrolet |
| Model | Reno | Camaro |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2013 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1998 cc | 6200 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 126 HP | 420 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5900 RPM |
| Torque | 178 Nm | 569 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 86 mm | 103 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 86 mm | 92 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.6:1 | 10.7 |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1262 kg | 1751 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4300 mm | 4836 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1730 mm | 1918 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1377 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2610 mm | 2852 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 7.8 L/100km | 9.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 10.7 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 9.4 L/100km | 12.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 55 L | 72 L |
