1999 Ford Mustang vs. 1964 Ford Falcon
To start off, 1999 Ford Mustang is newer by 35 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Ford Falcon. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Ford Falcon would be higher. At 4,605 cc (8 cylinders), 1999 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1964 Ford Falcon (282 HP @ 4400 RPM) has 26 more horse power than 1999 Ford Mustang. (256 HP @ 5250 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1964 Ford Falcon should accelerate faster than 1999 Ford Mustang. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1999 Ford Mustang weights approximately 782 kg more than 1964 Ford Falcon.
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. Let's talk about torque, 1999 Ford Mustang (406 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 162 more torque (in Nm) than 1964 Ford Falcon. (244 Nm @ 2800 RPM). This means 1999 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1964 Ford Falcon.
Compare all specifications:
1999 Ford Mustang | 1964 Ford Falcon | |
Make | Ford | Ford |
Model | Mustang | Falcon |
Year Released | 1999 | 1964 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4605 cc | 2890 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Horse Power | 256 HP | 282 HP |
Engine RPM | 5250 RPM | 4400 RPM |
Torque | 406 Nm | 244 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 2800 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 9.0:1 | 20.2:1 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1482 kg | 700 kg |