1965 Ford Mustang vs. 2003 Renault Megane
To start off, 2003 Renault Megane is newer by 38 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 4,733 cc (8 cylinders), 1965 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1965 Ford Mustang (208 HP @ 4400 RPM) has 90 more horse power than 2003 Renault Megane. (118 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1965 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 2003 Renault Megane.
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, 2003 Renault Megane, 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 | 2003 Renault Megane | |
Make | Ford | Renault |
Model | Mustang | Megane |
Year Released | 1965 | 2003 |
Body Type | Coupe | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4733 cc | 1870 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 208 HP | 118 HP |
Engine RPM | 4400 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4620 mm | 4510 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1740 mm | 1780 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1310 mm | 1470 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2750 mm | 2670 mm |