1979 Chrysler 160 vs. 1995 Ford Mustang
To start off, 1995 Ford Mustang is newer by 16 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1979 Chrysler 160. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1979 Chrysler 160 would be higher. At 4,942 cc (8 cylinders), 1995 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1995 Ford Mustang (212 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 123 more horse power than 1979 Chrysler 160. (89 HP @ 5800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1995 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 1979 Chrysler 160. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1995 Ford Mustang weights approximately 385 kg more than 1979 Chrysler 160. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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:
1979 Chrysler 160 | 1995 Ford Mustang | |
Make | Chrysler | Ford |
Model | 160 | Mustang |
Year Released | 1979 | 1995 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1639 cc | 4942 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 89 HP | 212 HP |
Engine RPM | 5800 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1085 kg | 1470 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4540 mm | 4660 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1730 mm | 1860 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1440 mm | 1360 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 2580 mm |