1962 Austin A 99 vs. 1965 Ford Mustang
To start off, 1965 Ford Mustang is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1962 Austin A 99. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1962 Austin A 99 would be higher. At 4,261 cc (8 cylinders), 1965 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1965 Ford Mustang (163 HP @ 4400 RPM) has 53 more horse power than 1962 Austin A 99. (110 HP @ 4750 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1965 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 1962 Austin A 99. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1962 Austin A 99 weights approximately 414 kg more than 1965 Ford Mustang.
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:
1962 Austin A 99 | 1965 Ford Mustang | |
Make | Austin | Ford |
Model | A 99 | Mustang |
Year Released | 1962 | 1965 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2912 cc | 4261 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 110 HP | 163 HP |
Engine RPM | 4750 RPM | 4400 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1530 kg | 1116 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4950 mm | 4620 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1750 mm | 1740 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1540 mm | 1310 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2800 mm | 2750 mm |