2006 Chevrolet Kodiak vs. 1996 Mitsubishi Challenger
To start off, 2006 Chevrolet Kodiak is newer by 10 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Mitsubishi Challenger. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Mitsubishi Challenger would be higher. At 6,600 cc (8 cylinders), 2006 Chevrolet Kodiak is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 1996 Mitsubishi Challenger is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2006 Chevrolet Kodiak. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1996 Mitsubishi Challenger will offer significantly more control. 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 Chevrolet Kodiak (820 Nm @ 1600 RPM) has 500 more torque (in Nm) than 1996 Mitsubishi Challenger. (320 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 2006 Chevrolet Kodiak will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1996 Mitsubishi Challenger.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Chevrolet Kodiak | 1996 Mitsubishi Challenger | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Mitsubishi |
| Model | Kodiak | Challenger |
| Year Released | 2006 | 1996 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 6600 cc | 2835 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 138 HP |
| Torque | 820 Nm | 320 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 1600 RPM | 2000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Diesel | Diesel |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 7 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Width | 2000 mm | 1780 mm |
