2002 Cadillac XLR vs. 1965 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2002 Cadillac XLR is newer by 37 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 4,733 cc (8 cylinders), 1965 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 Cadillac XLR (316 HP @ 6400 RPM) has 108 more horse power than 1965 Ford Mustang. (208 HP @ 4400 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2002 Cadillac XLR should accelerate faster than 1965 Ford Mustang. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2002 Cadillac XLR weights approximately 489 kg more than 1965 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:
2002 Cadillac XLR | 1965 Ford Mustang | |
Make | Cadillac | Ford |
Model | XLR | Mustang |
Year Released | 2002 | 1965 |
Body Type | Convertible | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4570 cc | 4733 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Horse Power | 316 HP | 208 HP |
Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 4400 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1654 kg | 1165 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4520 mm | 4620 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1840 mm | 1740 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1290 mm | 1310 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2690 mm | 2750 mm |