1966 Ford Mustang vs. 2000 Proton 400

To start off, 2000 Proton 400 is newer by 34 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Ford Mustang. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Ford Mustang would be higher. At 6,385 cc (8 cylinders), 1966 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1966 Ford Mustang (320 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 246 more horse power than 2000 Proton 400. (74 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1966 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 2000 Proton 400. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1966 Ford Mustang weights approximately 209 kg more than 2000 Proton 400. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.

Because 1966 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 1966 Ford Mustang. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Proton 400, 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. Let's talk about torque, 2000 Proton 400 (108 Nm) has 23 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 Ford Mustang. (85 Nm). This means 2000 Proton 400 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1966 Ford Mustang. 1966 Ford Mustang has automatic transmission and 2000 Proton 400 has manual transmission. 2000 Proton 400 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 1966 Ford Mustang will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.

Compare all specifications: