2009 Chevrolet Tahoe vs. 2012 Suzuki Equator
To start off, 2012 Suzuki Equator is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2009 Chevrolet Tahoe. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2009 Chevrolet Tahoe would be higher. At 4,800 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 Chevrolet Tahoe is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Chevrolet Tahoe (295 HP @ 5600 RPM) has 145 more horse power than 2012 Suzuki Equator. (150 HP @ 5600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Chevrolet Tahoe should accelerate faster than 2012 Suzuki Equator. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2009 Chevrolet Tahoe weights approximately 574 kg more than 2012 Suzuki Equator. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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, 2009 Chevrolet Tahoe (414 Nm @ 4600 RPM) has 243 more torque (in Nm) than 2012 Suzuki Equator. (171 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2009 Chevrolet Tahoe will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2012 Suzuki Equator.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Chevrolet Tahoe | 2012 Suzuki Equator | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Suzuki |
| Model | Tahoe | Equator |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2012 |
| Body Type | SUV | Pickup |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4800 cc | 2501 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 295 HP | 150 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 5600 RPM |
| Torque | 414 Nm | 171 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4600 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.3:1 | 9.5:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1549 kg | 975 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5140 mm | 5250 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2010 mm | 1860 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1960 mm | 1790 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2950 mm | 3200 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 12.4 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 16.8 L/100km | 15.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 14.7 L/100km | 7.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 98 L | 80 L |
