1980 Chrysler 1609 vs. 1997 Ford Mustang
To start off, 1997 Ford Mustang is newer by 17 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1980 Chrysler 1609. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1980 Chrysler 1609 would be higher. At 5,400 cc (8 cylinders), 1997 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1997 Ford Mustang (590 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 489 more horse power than 1980 Chrysler 1609. (101 HP @ 5800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1997 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 1980 Chrysler 1609. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1980 Chrysler 1609 weights approximately 170 kg more than 1997 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. Let's talk about torque, 1997 Ford Mustang (728 Nm) has 584 more torque (in Nm) than 1980 Chrysler 1609. (144 Nm). This means 1997 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1980 Chrysler 1609.
Compare all specifications:
| 1980 Chrysler 1609 | 1997 Ford Mustang | |
| Make | Chrysler | Ford |
| Model | 1609 | Mustang |
| Year Released | 1980 | 1997 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1812 cc | 5400 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 101 HP | 590 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5800 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Torque | 144 Nm | 728 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1100 kg | 930 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4530 mm | 4620 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1740 mm | 1830 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2670 mm | 2580 mm |
