1965 Ford Mustang vs. 2002 Volvo XC90
To start off, 2002 Volvo XC90 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 2,786 cc (6 cylinders), 1965 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 Volvo XC90 (197 HP @ 5000 RPM) has 97 more horse power than 1965 Ford Mustang. (100 HP @ 4400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2002 Volvo XC90 should accelerate faster than 1965 Ford Mustang. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2002 Volvo XC90 weights approximately 476 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 2002 Volvo XC90 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, 2002 Volvo XC90 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 | 2002 Volvo XC90 | |
| Make | Ford | Volvo |
| Model | Mustang | XC90 |
| Year Released | 1965 | 2002 |
| Body Type | Coupe | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2786 cc | 2519 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 5 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 100 HP | 197 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4400 RPM | 5000 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 7 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 975 kg | 1451 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4620 mm | 4800 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1740 mm | 1900 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1310 mm | 1790 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2750 mm | 2860 mm |
