2000 Ford Mustang vs. 1963 Renault 4
To start off, 2000 Ford Mustang is newer by 37 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Renault 4. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Renault 4 would be higher. At 4,600 cc (8 cylinders), 2000 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Ford Mustang (270 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 237 more horse power than 1963 Renault 4. (33 HP @ 4500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 1963 Renault 4. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Ford Mustang weights approximately 558 kg more than 1963 Renault 4. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2000 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 2000 Ford Mustang. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1963 Renault 4, 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:
| 2000 Ford Mustang | 1963 Renault 4 | |
| Make | Ford | Renault |
| Model | Mustang | 4 |
| Year Released | 2000 | 1963 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4600 cc | 747 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 270 HP | 33 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1208 kg | 650 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4620 mm | 3670 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1830 mm | 1490 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1560 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2410 mm |
