1979 Ford Mustang vs. 2004 Mitsubishi eK
To start off, 2004 Mitsubishi eK is newer by 25 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1979 Ford Mustang. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1979 Ford Mustang would be higher. At 3,273 cc (6 cylinders), 1979 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1979 Ford Mustang weights approximately 430 kg more than 2004 Mitsubishi eK.
Because 1979 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 1979 Ford Mustang. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Mitsubishi eK, 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. 2004 Mitsubishi eK has automatic transmission and 1979 Ford Mustang has manual transmission. 1979 Ford Mustang will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2004 Mitsubishi eK will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
1979 Ford Mustang | 2004 Mitsubishi eK | |
Make | Ford | Mitsubishi |
Model | Mustang | eK |
Year Released | 1979 | 2004 |
Body Type | Coupe | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3273 cc | 657 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 90 HP | 0 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1220 kg | 790 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4560 mm | 3400 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1480 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1320 mm | 1560 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2560 mm | 2350 mm |