2006 Audi A3 vs. 2003 Chevrolet Tracker
To start off, 2006 Audi A3 is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Chevrolet Tracker. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Chevrolet Tracker would be higher. At 1,984 cc, 2006 Audi A3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Audi A3 (197 HP) has 100 more horse power than 2003 Chevrolet Tracker. (97 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Audi A3 should accelerate faster than 2003 Chevrolet Tracker.
Because 2003 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 2003 Chevrolet Tracker. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Audi A3, 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, 2006 Audi A3 (281 Nm) has 142 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Chevrolet Tracker. (139 Nm). This means 2006 Audi A3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Chevrolet Tracker.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Audi A3 | 2003 Chevrolet Tracker | |
Make | Audi | Chevrolet |
Model | A3 | Tracker |
Year Released | 2006 | 2003 |
Body Type | Hatchback | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1984 cc | 1590 cc |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 197 HP | 97 HP |
Torque | 281 Nm | 139 Nm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Length | 4290 mm | 3860 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1770 mm | 1720 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1700 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2210 mm |