2009 Chevrolet Equinox vs. 1963 Triumph 2000
To start off, 2009 Chevrolet Equinox is newer by 46 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Triumph 2000. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Triumph 2000 would be higher. At 3,425 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Chevrolet Equinox is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Chevrolet Equinox (185 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 55 more horse power than 1963 Triumph 2000. (130 HP @ 5500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Chevrolet Equinox should accelerate faster than 1963 Triumph 2000. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2009 Chevrolet Equinox weights approximately 66 kg more than 1963 Triumph 2000. 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 Chevrolet Equinox (285 Nm @ 3800 RPM) has 87 more torque (in Nm) than 1963 Triumph 2000. (198 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 2009 Chevrolet Equinox will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1963 Triumph 2000.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Chevrolet Equinox | 1963 Triumph 2000 | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Triumph |
| Model | Equinox | 2000 |
| Year Released | 2009 | 1963 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3425 cc | 2498 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 185 HP | 130 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Torque | 285 Nm | 198 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3800 RPM | 2000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1261 kg | 1195 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4800 mm | 4420 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1820 mm | 1660 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1710 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2860 mm | 2700 mm |
