2000 Ford Mustang vs. 1963 Volkswagen 1500
To start off, 2000 Ford Mustang is newer by 37 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Volkswagen 1500. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Volkswagen 1500 would be higher. At 4,603 cc (8 cylinders), 2000 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Ford Mustang (260 HP @ 5250 RPM) has 208 more horse power than 1963 Volkswagen 1500. (52 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 1963 Volkswagen 1500. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Ford Mustang weights approximately 620 kg more than 1963 Volkswagen 1500. 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 Ford Mustang | 1963 Volkswagen 1500 | |
Make | Ford | Volkswagen |
Model | Mustang | 1500 |
Year Released | 2000 | 1963 |
Engine Position | Front | Rear |
Engine Size | 4603 cc | 1491 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 260 HP | 52 HP |
Engine RPM | 5250 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 1480 kg | 860 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4660 mm | 4230 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1620 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1360 mm | 1480 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2410 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 59 L | 40 L |