2000 Ford Mustang vs. 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass
To start off, 2000 Ford Mustang is newer by 18 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass would be higher. At 3,801 cc (6 cylinders), 2000 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass weights approximately 88 kg more than 2000 Ford Mustang.
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. 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass has automatic transmission and 2000 Ford Mustang has manual transmission. 2000 Ford Mustang will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Ford Mustang | 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass | |
| Make | Ford | Oldsmobile |
| Model | Mustang | Cutlass |
| Year Released | 2000 | 1982 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3801 cc | 3789 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 187 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 4 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1392 kg | 1480 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4660 mm | 5030 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1830 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1360 mm | 1380 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2760 mm |
