1997 Ford Mustang vs. 2002 MCC Crossblade
To start off, 2002 MCC Crossblade is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1997 Ford Mustang. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1997 Ford Mustang would be higher. At 4,942 cc (8 cylinders), 1997 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1997 Ford Mustang (212 HP) has 142 more horse power than 2002 MCC Crossblade. (70 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1997 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 2002 MCC Crossblade. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1997 Ford Mustang weights approximately 736 kg more than 2002 MCC Crossblade. 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.
Compare all specifications:
1997 Ford Mustang | 2002 MCC Crossblade | |
Make | Ford | MCC |
Model | Mustang | Crossblade |
Year Released | 1997 | 2002 |
Engine Size | 4942 cc | 599 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 212 HP | 70 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Vehicle Weight | 1476 kg | 740 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4660 mm | 2630 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1630 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1360 mm | 1520 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 1810 mm |