1965 Ford Mustang vs. 2002 Opel Omega
To start off, 2002 Opel Omega is newer by 37 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 14 more horse power than 2002 Opel Omega. (149 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1965 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 2002 Opel Omega. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2002 Opel Omega weights approximately 617 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 | 2002 Opel Omega | |
| Make | Ford | Opel |
| Model | Mustang | Omega |
| Year Released | 1965 | 2002 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4261 cc | 2497 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 163 HP | 149 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4400 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1116 kg | 1733 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4620 mm | 4900 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1740 mm | 1780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1310 mm | 1550 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2750 mm | 2710 mm |
