1965 Ford Mustang vs. 2000 Toyota Tundra
To start off, 2000 Toyota Tundra is newer by 35 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 4,663 cc (8 cylinders), 2000 Toyota Tundra is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Toyota Tundra (242 HP @ 4800 RPM) has 142 more horse power than 1965 Ford Mustang. (100 HP @ 4400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2000 Toyota Tundra should accelerate faster than 1965 Ford Mustang. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Toyota Tundra weights approximately 975 kg more than 1965 Ford Mustang. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2000 Toyota Tundra is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1965 Ford Mustang. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Toyota Tundra will offer significantly more control. 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 | 2000 Toyota Tundra | |
| Make | Ford | Toyota |
| Model | Mustang | Tundra |
| Year Released | 1965 | 2000 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Pickup |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2786 cc | 4663 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 100 HP | 242 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4400 RPM | 4800 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Vehicle Weight | 975 kg | 1950 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4620 mm | 5530 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1740 mm | 1920 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1310 mm | 1800 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2750 mm | 3270 mm |
