1996 Ford Mustang vs. 1981 Seat Ritmo
To start off, 1996 Ford Mustang is newer by 15 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1981 Seat Ritmo. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1981 Seat Ritmo would be higher. At 4,942 cc (8 cylinders), 1996 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1996 Ford Mustang (212 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 149 more horse power than 1981 Seat Ritmo. (63 HP @ 5800 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1996 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 1981 Seat Ritmo. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1996 Ford Mustang weights approximately 588 kg more than 1981 Seat Ritmo. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 1996 Ford Mustang is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 1996 Ford Mustang. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1981 Seat Ritmo, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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:
| 1996 Ford Mustang | 1981 Seat Ritmo | |
| Make | Ford | Seat |
| Model | Mustang | Ritmo |
| Year Released | 1996 | 1981 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4942 cc | 1197 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 212 HP | 63 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 5800 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Vehicle Weight | 1470 kg | 882 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4660 mm | 3950 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1660 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1360 mm | 1410 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2460 mm |
