2000 AC Aceca vs. 1995 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2000 AC Aceca is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1995 Ford Mustang. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1995 Ford Mustang would be higher. At 4,942 cc (8 cylinders), 1995 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 AC Aceca (346 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 134 more horse power than 1995 Ford Mustang. (212 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 AC Aceca should accelerate faster than 1995 Ford Mustang. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 AC Aceca weights approximately 140 kg more than 1995 Ford Mustang. 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:
2000 AC Aceca | 1995 Ford Mustang | |
Make | AC | Ford |
Model | Aceca | Mustang |
Year Released | 2000 | 1995 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3504 cc | 4942 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Horse Power | 346 HP | 212 HP |
Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1610 kg | 1470 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4640 mm | 4660 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1860 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1360 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2300 mm | 2580 mm |