2003 Ford Mustang vs. 1992 Plymouth Colt

To start off, 2003 Ford Mustang is newer by 11 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1992 Plymouth Colt. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1992 Plymouth Colt would be higher. At 4,601 cc (8 cylinders), 2003 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Ford Mustang (400 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 289 more horse power than 1992 Plymouth Colt. (111 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2003 Ford Mustang should accelerate faster than 1992 Plymouth Colt. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Ford Mustang weights approximately 267 kg more than 1992 Plymouth Colt. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.

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, 1992 Plymouth Colt, 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. Let's talk about torque, 2003 Ford Mustang (530 Nm @ 3500 RPM) has 373 more torque (in Nm) than 1992 Plymouth Colt. (157 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2003 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1992 Plymouth Colt.

Compare all specifications: