1982 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 2003 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2003 Ford Mustang is newer by 21 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Chevrolet Camaro. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Chevrolet Camaro would be higher. At 4,599 cc (8 cylinders), 2003 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Ford Mustang (400 HP @ 5750 RPM) has 299 more horse power than 1982 Chevrolet Camaro. (101 HP @ 4800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2003 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 1982 Chevrolet Camaro.
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, 2003 Ford Mustang (556 Nm @ 3500 RPM) has 364 more torque (in Nm) than 1982 Chevrolet Camaro. (192 Nm @ 2400 RPM). This means 2003 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1982 Chevrolet Camaro.
Compare all specifications:
| 1982 Chevrolet Camaro | 2003 Ford Mustang | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Ford |
| Model | Camaro | Mustang |
| Year Released | 1982 | 2003 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Convertible |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2835 cc | 4599 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 101 HP | 400 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4800 RPM | 5750 RPM |
| Torque | 192 Nm | 556 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2400 RPM | 3500 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4880 mm | 4660 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1860 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2580 mm |
