1965 AC Aceca vs. 1999 Ford Mustang
To start off, 1999 Ford Mustang is newer by 34 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 AC Aceca. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 AC Aceca would be higher. At 2,552 cc (6 cylinders), 1965 AC Aceca is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1999 Ford Mustang weights approximately 417 kg more than 1965 AC Aceca.
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, 1965 AC Aceca (209 Nm) has 49 more torque (in Nm) than 1999 Ford Mustang. (160 Nm). This means 1965 AC Aceca will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1999 Ford Mustang.
Compare all specifications:
| 1965 AC Aceca | 1999 Ford Mustang | |
| Make | AC | Ford |
| Model | Aceca | Mustang |
| Year Released | 1965 | 1999 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2552 cc | 1753 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 168 HP | 0 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5500 RPM | 5750 RPM |
| Torque | 209 Nm | 160 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 791 kg | 1208 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4070 mm | 4620 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1560 mm | 1830 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1330 mm | 1350 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2290 mm | 2540 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 54 L | 68 L |
