1964 Austin A 90 vs. 1969 Ford Mustang
To start off, 1969 Ford Mustang is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Austin A 90. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Austin A 90 would be higher. At 4,731 cc (8 cylinders), 1969 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1969 Ford Mustang (217 HP @ 4800 RPM) has 97 more horse power than 1964 Austin A 90. (120 HP @ 4750 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1969 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 1964 Austin A 90. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1964 Austin A 90 weights approximately 407 kg more than 1969 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:
1964 Austin A 90 | 1969 Ford Mustang | |
Make | Austin | Ford |
Model | A 90 | Mustang |
Year Released | 1964 | 1969 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2912 cc | 4731 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 120 HP | 217 HP |
Engine RPM | 4750 RPM | 4800 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 | 1572 kg | 1165 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4780 mm | 4620 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1750 mm | 1740 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1540 mm | 1310 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2750 mm | 2750 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 34 L | 41 L |