1996 Ford Mustang vs. 1963 Nissan Cedric
To start off, 1996 Ford Mustang is newer by 33 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Nissan Cedric. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Nissan Cedric would be higher. At 3,797 cc (6 cylinders), 1996 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1996 Ford Mustang (143 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 83 more horse power than 1963 Nissan Cedric. (60 HP @ 5000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1996 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 1963 Nissan Cedric. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1996 Ford Mustang weights approximately 305 kg more than 1963 Nissan Cedric. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 1996 Ford Mustang (298 Nm @ 2750 RPM) has 183 more torque (in Nm) than 1963 Nissan Cedric. (115 Nm @ 3200 RPM). This means 1996 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1963 Nissan Cedric.
Compare all specifications:
1996 Ford Mustang | 1963 Nissan Cedric | |
Make | Ford | Nissan |
Model | Mustang | Cedric |
Year Released | 1996 | 1963 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3797 cc | 1488 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 143 HP | 60 HP |
Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 5000 RPM |
Torque | 298 Nm | 115 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2750 RPM | 3200 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Vehicle Weight | 1390 kg | 1085 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4660 mm | 4420 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1690 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1360 mm | 1530 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2540 mm |