2003 Ford Mustang vs. 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass
To start off, 2003 Ford Mustang is newer by 21 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 4,599 cc (8 cylinders), 2003 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Ford Mustang weights approximately 154 kg more than 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass.
Because 2003 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 2003 Ford Mustang. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass, 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:
| 2003 Ford Mustang | 1982 Oldsmobile Cutlass | |
| Make | Ford | Oldsmobile |
| Model | Mustang | Cutlass |
| Year Released | 2003 | 1982 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4599 cc | 2260 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 400 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1480 kg | 1326 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4660 mm | 4850 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1780 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2580 mm | 2680 mm |
