1986 Caterham 1700 vs. 1965 Ford Mustang
To start off, 1986 Caterham 1700 is newer by 21 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 Ford Mustang. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 Ford Mustang would be higher. At 4,261 cc (8 cylinders), 1965 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1986 Caterham 1700 (168 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 5 more horse power than 1965 Ford Mustang. (163 HP @ 4400 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1986 Caterham 1700 should accelerate faster than 1965 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.
Compare all specifications:
1986 Caterham 1700 | 1965 Ford Mustang | |
Make | Caterham | Ford |
Model | 1700 | Mustang |
Year Released | 1986 | 1965 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1692 cc | 4261 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 168 HP | 163 HP |
Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 4400 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 4 seats |
Vehicle Length | 3390 mm | 4620 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1590 mm | 1740 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1050 mm | 1310 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2260 mm | 2750 mm |