1969 Datsun 1600 vs. 2004 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2004 Ford Mustang is newer by 35 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1969 Datsun 1600. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1969 Datsun 1600 would be higher. At 3,801 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine.
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:
| 1969 Datsun 1600 | 2004 Ford Mustang | |
| Make | Datsun | Ford |
| Model | 1600 | Mustang |
| Year Released | 1969 | 2004 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1600 cc | 3801 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 190 HP |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Fuel Consumption | 7.8 L/100km | 8.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 11.8 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 10.7 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |
