1982 Zastava 132 vs. 2004 Ford Mustang

To start off, 2004 Ford Mustang is newer by 22 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Zastava 132. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Zastava 132 would be higher. At 3,931 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Ford Mustang (200 HP @ 5250 RPM) has 94 more horse power than 1982 Zastava 132. (106 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2004 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 1982 Zastava 132. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Ford Mustang weights approximately 289 kg more than 1982 Zastava 132. 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. Let's talk about torque, 2004 Ford Mustang (310 Nm @ 3500 RPM) has 168 more torque (in Nm) than 1982 Zastava 132. (142 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2004 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1982 Zastava 132. 2004 Ford Mustang has automatic transmission and 1982 Zastava 132 has manual transmission. 1982 Zastava 132 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2004 Ford Mustang will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.

Compare all specifications: