2009 BMW M6 vs. 2004 Chevrolet Tracker
To start off, 2009 BMW M6 is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Chevrolet Tracker would be higher. At 4,999 cc (10 cylinders), 2009 BMW M6 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 BMW M6 (501 HP @ 7750 RPM) has 336 more horse power than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. (165 HP @ 5600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 BMW M6 should accelerate faster than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2009 BMW M6 weights approximately 485 kg more than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2009 BMW M6 (520 Nm) has 299 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker. (221 Nm). This means 2009 BMW M6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Chevrolet Tracker.
Compare all specifications:
2009 BMW M6 | 2004 Chevrolet Tracker | |
Make | BMW | Chevrolet |
Model | M6 | Tracker |
Year Released | 2009 | 2004 |
Body Type | Coupe | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4999 cc | 2491 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 10 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 501 HP | 165 HP |
Engine RPM | 7750 RPM | 5600 RPM |
Torque | 520 Nm | 221 Nm |
Engine Bore Size | 92 mm | 84 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 75.2 mm | 75 mm |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1785 kg | 1300 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4880 mm | 4140 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1380 mm | 1720 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1860 mm | 1670 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2790 mm | 2490 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 14.8 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 70 L | 61 L |