2001 Fiat Ecobasic vs. 1965 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2001 Fiat Ecobasic is newer by 36 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 Ford Mustang. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 Ford Mustang would be higher. At 2,786 cc (6 cylinders), 1965 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1965 Ford Mustang (100 HP @ 4400 RPM) has 40 more horse power than 2001 Fiat Ecobasic. (60 HP @ 3500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1965 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 2001 Fiat Ecobasic. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1965 Ford Mustang weights approximately 219 kg more than 2001 Fiat Ecobasic. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 1965 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 1965 Ford Mustang. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2001 Fiat Ecobasic, 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:
| 2001 Fiat Ecobasic | 1965 Ford Mustang | |
| Make | Fiat | Ford |
| Model | Ecobasic | Mustang |
| Year Released | 2001 | 1965 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1200 cc | 2786 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 60 HP | 100 HP |
| Engine RPM | 3500 RPM | 4400 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Diesel | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 756 kg | 975 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3500 mm | 4620 mm |
