2003 BMW 520 vs. 2012 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2012 Ford Mustang is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 BMW 520. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 BMW 520 would be higher. At 3,700 cc (6 cylinders), 2012 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Ford Mustang (305 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 138 more horse power than 2003 BMW 520. (167 HP @ 6100 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 2003 BMW 520. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 BMW 520 weights approximately 104 kg more than 2012 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. Let's talk about torque, 2012 Ford Mustang (379 Nm @ 4250 RPM) has 169 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 BMW 520. (210 Nm @ 3500 RPM). This means 2012 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 BMW 520.
Compare all specifications:
| 2003 BMW 520 | 2012 Ford Mustang | |
| Make | BMW | Ford |
| Model | 520 | Mustang |
| Year Released | 2003 | 2012 |
| Body Type | Station Wagon | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2170 cc | 3700 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 167 HP | 305 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6100 RPM | 6500 RPM |
| Torque | 210 Nm | 379 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3500 RPM | 4250 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1670 kg | 1566 kg |
| Fuel Consumption | 7.5 L/100km | 8.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 12.8 L/100km | 12.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 70 L | 61 L |
