1980 Bristol Britannia vs. 2004 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2004 Ford Mustang is newer by 24 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1980 Bristol Britannia. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1980 Bristol Britannia would be higher. At 5,898 cc (8 cylinders), 1980 Bristol Britannia is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1980 Bristol Britannia weights approximately 90 kg more than 2004 Ford Mustang.
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. 1980 Bristol Britannia has automatic transmission and 2004 Ford Mustang has manual transmission. 2004 Ford Mustang will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 1980 Bristol Britannia will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 1980 Bristol Britannia | 2004 Ford Mustang | |
| Make | Bristol | Ford |
| Model | Britannia | Mustang |
| Year Released | 1980 | 2004 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5898 cc | 4606 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 296 HP |
| Engine Bore Size | 101.6 mm | 90.1 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 90.9 mm | 90 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 8.0:1 | 9.8:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1752 kg | 1662 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5010 mm | 4770 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1880 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1390 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2910 mm | 2620 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 82 L | 59 L |
