1998 Chrysler Concorde vs. 1969 Ford Mustang
To start off, 1998 Chrysler Concorde is newer by 29 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1969 Ford Mustang. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1969 Ford Mustang would be higher. At 4,731 cc (8 cylinders), 1969 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1969 Ford Mustang (217 HP @ 4800 RPM) has 27 more horse power than 1998 Chrysler Concorde. (190 HP @ 5800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1969 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 1998 Chrysler Concorde. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1998 Chrysler Concorde weights approximately 410 kg more than 1969 Ford Mustang.
Because 1969 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 1969 Ford Mustang. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1998 Chrysler Concorde, 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:
1998 Chrysler Concorde | 1969 Ford Mustang | |
Make | Chrysler | Ford |
Model | Concorde | Mustang |
Year Released | 1998 | 1969 |
Body Type | Sedan | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2734 cc | 4731 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Horse Power | 190 HP | 217 HP |
Engine RPM | 5800 RPM | 4800 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1575 kg | 1165 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5280 mm | 4620 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1900 mm | 1740 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 1310 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2880 mm | 2750 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 41 L |