2006 Chevrolet SSR vs. 1965 Triumph 2000
To start off, 2006 Chevrolet SSR is newer by 41 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 Triumph 2000. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 Triumph 2000 would be higher. At 5,965 cc (8 cylinders), 2006 Chevrolet SSR is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Chevrolet SSR (401 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 312 more horse power than 1965 Triumph 2000. (89 HP @ 5000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Chevrolet SSR should accelerate faster than 1965 Triumph 2000. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1965 Triumph 2000 weights approximately 92 kg more than 2006 Chevrolet SSR.
Let's talk about torque, 2006 Chevrolet SSR (542 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 384 more torque (in Nm) than 1965 Triumph 2000. (158 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2006 Chevrolet SSR will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1965 Triumph 2000.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Chevrolet SSR | 1965 Triumph 2000 | |
Make | Chevrolet | Triumph |
Model | SSR | 2000 |
Year Released | 2006 | 1965 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5965 cc | 1997 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 401 HP | 89 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5000 RPM |
Torque | 542 Nm | 158 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 3000 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 101.6 mm | 74.7 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 91.4 mm | 76 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 10.9:1 | 9.3:1 |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1078 kg | 1170 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 4420 mm |
Vehicle Width | 2000 mm | 1660 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1630 mm | 1430 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2950 mm | 2700 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 95 L | 64 L |