1956 AC Aceca vs. 2013 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2013 Ford Mustang is newer by 57 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1956 AC Aceca. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1956 AC Aceca would be higher. At 5,000 cc (8 cylinders), 2013 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Ford Mustang (414 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 340 more horse power than 1956 AC Aceca. (74 HP @ 4500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 1956 AC Aceca. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Ford Mustang weights approximately 755 kg more than 1956 AC Aceca. 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.
Compare all specifications:
1956 AC Aceca | 2013 Ford Mustang | |
Make | AC | Ford |
Model | Aceca | Mustang |
Year Released | 1956 | 2013 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1971 cc | 5000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 74 HP | 414 HP |
Engine RPM | 4500 RPM | 6500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed manual |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 890 kg | 1645 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4070 mm | 4778 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1560 mm | 2035 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1330 mm | 1412 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2290 mm | 2720 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 59 L | 61 L |