1965 Ford Mustang vs. 2000 Volvo V40
To start off, 2000 Volvo V40 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 4,261 cc (8 cylinders), 1965 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Volvo V40 (197 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 34 more horse power than 1965 Ford Mustang. (163 HP @ 4400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2000 Volvo V40 should accelerate faster than 1965 Ford Mustang. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Volvo V40 weights approximately 279 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 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, 2000 Volvo V40, 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 | 2000 Volvo V40 | |
Make | Ford | Volvo |
Model | Mustang | V40 |
Year Released | 1965 | 2000 |
Body Type | Coupe | Station Wagon |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4261 cc | 1948 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 163 HP | 197 HP |
Engine RPM | 4400 RPM | 5500 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1116 kg | 1395 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4620 mm | 4520 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1740 mm | 1720 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1310 mm | 1430 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2750 mm | 2650 mm |