1956 Austin-Healey Tickford vs. 2004 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2004 Ford Mustang is newer by 48 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford would be higher. At 3,931 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Ford Mustang (200 HP @ 5250 RPM) has 95 more horse power than 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford. (105 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2004 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford weights approximately 143 kg more than 2004 Ford Mustang.
Let's talk about torque, 2004 Ford Mustang (310 Nm @ 3500 RPM) has 126 more torque (in Nm) than 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford. (184 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2004 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1956 Austin-Healey Tickford.
Compare all specifications:
1956 Austin-Healey Tickford | 2004 Ford Mustang | |
Make | Austin-Healey | Ford |
Model | Tickford | Mustang |
Year Released | 1956 | 2004 |
Body Type | Sedan | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2443 cc | 3931 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 105 HP | 200 HP |
Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 5250 RPM |
Torque | 184 Nm | 310 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 3500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Vehicle Weight | 1530 kg | 1387 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 4770 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1880 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1390 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 2720 mm |