1965 Ford Mustang vs. 1977 Chrysler 1609
To start off, 1977 Chrysler 1609 is newer by 12 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 Ford Mustang. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 Ford Mustang would be higher. At 2,786 cc (6 cylinders), 1965 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1965 Ford Mustang (100 HP @ 4400 RPM) has 10 more horse power than 1977 Chrysler 1609. (90 HP @ 5800 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1965 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 1977 Chrysler 1609. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1977 Chrysler 1609 weights approximately 115 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:
| 1965 Ford Mustang | 1977 Chrysler 1609 | |
| Make | Ford | Chrysler |
| Model | Mustang | 1609 |
| Year Released | 1965 | 1977 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2786 cc | 1639 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 100 HP | 90 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4400 RPM | 5800 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 975 kg | 1090 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4620 mm | 4530 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1740 mm | 1740 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1310 mm | 1450 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2750 mm | 2670 mm |
