1965 Ford Mustang vs. 1989 Oldsmobile Cutlass
To start off, 1989 Oldsmobile Cutlass is newer by 24 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 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 4 more horse power than 1989 Oldsmobile Cutlass. (159 HP @ 6200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1965 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 1989 Oldsmobile Cutlass. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1989 Oldsmobile Cutlass weights approximately 329 kg more than 1965 Ford Mustang.
Because 1965 Ford Mustang is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 1965 Ford Mustang. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1989 Oldsmobile Cutlass, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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 | 1989 Oldsmobile Cutlass | |
| Make | Ford | Oldsmobile |
| Model | Mustang | Cutlass |
| Year Released | 1965 | 1989 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4261 cc | 2260 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 163 HP | 159 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4400 RPM | 6200 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Vehicle Weight | 1116 kg | 1445 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4620 mm | 4930 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1740 mm | 1810 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1310 mm | 1350 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2750 mm | 2740 mm |
